LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN DECENTRALIZED LOCAL

GOVERNMENT IN CAMBODIA: CASE STUDIES OF COMMUNE

COUNCILS

by

Young Sokphea

A thesis proposal submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Degree of Master of Science in Regional and Rural Development Planning

Examination Committee: Dr. Soparth Pongquan (Chairperson)

Dr. Mokbul M. Ahmad
Dr. Kyoko Kusakabe

Nationality: Cambodian
Previous Degree: Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Economics and Rural
Development
Royal University of Agriculture
Phnom Penh, Cambodia

Scholarship Donor: Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD)

Asian Institute of Technology

School of Environment, Resources and Development
Bangkok, Thailand
August 2009
 Table of Contents
 
CHAPTER TITLE ......................................................................................................... PAGE
 
List of Tables .......................................................................................................ii
List of Figures .....................................................................................................ii
List of Map ..........................................................................................................ii
Abbreviations .................................................................................................. iiiii

I INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem .......................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Questions ................................................................................... 5
1.4 Research Objectives .................................................................................. 5
1.5 Rationale of the Research ......................................................................... 5
1.6 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................. 7
1.7 Scope and Limitations of the Research ................................................... 10

II LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 12

2.1 Concept of Governance........................................................................... 12
2.2 Principles of Good Governance .............................................................. 14
2.3 Actors in Governance ............................................................................. 15
2.4 Impacts of Governance in Development................................................. 17
2.5 Concept of Decentralization ................................................................... 19
2.6 Decentralized Local Government ........................................................... 20
2.7 Decentralization and Local Governance in Asia .................................... 21
2.8 Governance Policy in Cambodia ............................................................ 23
2.9 Public Administrative Reform in Cambodia........................................... 24
2.10 Local Governance Performance of Decentralized Local Government in
Cambodia ................................................................................................ 25
2.11 Decentralized Planning and Local Development in Cambodia .............. 26

III RESEARCH DESIGN ....................................................................................... 31

3.1 Type of Research and Research Design.................................................. 31
3.2 Selection of the Study Area .................................................................... 31
3.3 Selection of CCs Members and Sampled Households............................ 33
3.4 Data Sources and Data Collection Methods ........................................... 35
3.5 Data Analysis and Technique ................................................................. 37

References ................................................................................................................................ 41
Annex IX: Research Plan 2009-2010 ...................................................................................... 82
Annex XI: Research Budget Estimation .................................................................................. 83 

i
 
 List of Tables
 
Table 2.1 Various Definitions of Good Governance 13
Table 2.2Key Components of Good Governance 14
Table 2.3Roles of Actor in Governance 15
Table 2.4 Levels of Local Government in Asia 20
Table 2. 5: Commune Development Planning Process Applied in Research 27
Table 2. 6: NCDD's Development Program and Resources 2009 30 

List of Figures
 
Figure1.1 Conceptual Framework of the Research 9
Figure 2.1: Main Actor in Governance and their Relationship 17
Figure 2.2: Decentralization towards Local Good Governance and Services Delivery 21
Figure 2.3: Dimension of Citizen-Centre Local Governance 22
Figure 2. 4: Local Good Governance Principles 23
Figure 2. 5:Governance Reform in Cambodia 24
Figure 2. 6: Public Administrative Reform and Good Governance in Cambodia 25
Figure 2. 7: Commune Development Planning Cycle Applied in Research 29
Figure 3. 1: Structure of Selected Communes and its Population to be interviewed 33
Figure 3.2: Sampling Procedures and Methods 34
Figure 3.3: Research Design 40
 
List of Map
 
Map 3.1: Map Showing the Study Area of Khnach Romeas and Prey Khpos Communes 32

List of Annexes
Annex I: Research Coordination Schema 47
Annex II: Checklist for Secondary Data Collection 55
Annex III: A Checklist for Key Informants Interview 56
Annex IV: Questionnaires 58
Annex V: A Checklist for Group Discussion of CCs 74
Annex VI: A Checklist for Group Discussion of Villagers 74
Annex VII: Commune Development Plan (CDP) and Commune Investment Plan (CIP) 75
Annex VIII: Cycle of Commune Development Plan and Commune Investment Plan 81

ii
 
 Abbreviations
 
ADB Asian Development Bank
AFDB African Development Bank
Ausaid Australian Agency for International Development
CAR Councils for Administrative Reform
CARERE Cambodia Resettlement and Reintegration
CBOs Community Based Organizations
CCF Commune Councils Fund
CCs Commune Councils
CDC Councils of Development of Cambodia
CDP Commune Development Plans
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
CIP Commune Investment Plan
CMDG Cambodian Millennium Development Goals
COMFREL Committee for Free and Fair Elections in Cambodia
CSOs Civil Society Organizations
DANIDA Denish International Development Agency
DDLG Democratic Development and Local Governance
DFID Department for International Development of United Kingdom
EC European Commission
GAP Governance Action Plan
GDP Gross Domestic Products
GG Good Governance
GRET Research and Technological Exchange Group
ICT Information and Communication Technology
IDLD Innovation for Decentralization Development
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
IMF International Monetary Fund
IOs International Organizations
LAMC Law on Administrative and Management of Commune
LGG Local Good Governance
LNGOs Local Non-governmental Organizations
M and E Monitoring and Evaluation
MoI Ministry of Interior
NCDD National Committee for Sub-nation Deconcentration and Decentralization
NCSC National Committee for Support to Commune/Sangkat
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
NRML Natural Resources Management and Livelihood
NSSD National Strategy for Sustainable Development
PACT PACT Cambodia
PBC Planning and Budgeting Committee
PBCs Planning and Budgeting Committee
PIM Project Implement Manual
PPP Public Private Partnership
Prakas Proclamation
PRDC Provincial Rural Development Committee
PSDD The Project to Support Democratic Development through Decentralization and
Deconcentration (PSDD)
PVOs People Voluntary Organizations

iii
 
RGC Royal Government of Cambodia
RILG Rural Investment and Local Governance
RLIP Rural Livelihood Improvement Project
RPRP Rural Poverty Reduction Project
Seila Seila Program
Seth Koma Children’s Right
UK United Kingdom
UNCDF United Nations Capital for Development Fund
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNESCAP United Nations Economics and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNICEF The United Nations Children's Fund
UNOHRC United Nations Office for Human Right Commission
UNTAC United Nations Authority to Cambodia
USAID United State Agency for International Development
VDC Village Development Committee
WB World Bank

iv
 
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This chapter consists of seven sections. The background of the study is given in the first
section, while the second section mainly focuses on the research problem. Research questions
and its objectives are discussed in the third, and the forth sections, respectively. The fifth and
sixth sections present the rationale of the research and the conceptual framework, while the
last section defines the scope and limitations of the research.

1.1 Background

Situated in Southeast Asia, Cambodia has total area of 181 035 square km with total
population of 14 444 thousand in 2007 and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita was
US$ 358 in 2007 (UNESCAP, 2008) and real GDP growth rate was 7.0 per cent in 2008. In
2004, there was 35 per cent of total population were living under national poverty line
(UNESCAP, 2009).

The political system in deferent regimes defined deferent types of governance models in
Cambodia (Te, 2007:58). After the election which arranged United Nations Authority to
Cambodia (UNTAC), which is known as UN peacekeeper, held in 1993, Cambodia is known
as “The Kingdom of Cambodia” and its political system is known as multiparty democracy
constitutional monarchy (Kato et al, 2000:7). In other means the establishment of constitution
is identified as the foundation for the development of Cambodia’s governance system (Royal
Government of Cambodia, 2000).

In 2004, Royal Government of Cambodia adopted new plan called “Rectangular Strategy”.
Good governance lies at the cornerstone of this strategy. Royal Government of Cambodia
(2004:6) perceived that “Good governance is the most important pre-condition to economic
development with sustainability, equity and social justice. Good governance requires wide
participation, enhanced sharing of information, accountability, transparency, equality,
inclusiveness and the rule of law”. To achieve good governance, separately, Royal
Government of Cambodia developed the Governance Action Plan (GAP). Among other
elements of this action plan, administrative reforms, decentralization and deconcentration are
imperative elements to achieve the good governance. Under this pillar, decentralization and
local governance is a target of it and it is perceived that local governance is as mean to further
democratize the nation and to improve service delivery at local level (RGC, 2004:9,11).

The term of local development and local governance have been emerged in the development
context of Cambodia since 1996 when the Seila Program was initiated by applying
decentralization policy in order to achieve poverty reduction through improved local
governance and local development. Thus the Seila Program initiated decentralized commune
development planning, financing, management system and monitoring, evaluation and
information system in Cambodia since that time (RGC, 2000:37). At the first pilot projects
were implemented in five provinces, in 1996, and gradually extended to 12 provinces by the
end of 2000. It was supported by Cambodia Area Rehabilitation and Regeneration Project
(CARERE 2) (CDC, 2004). CARERE 2 was designed to support the implementation of the
Seila Program of Royal Government of Cambodia, which followed by the CARERE1
(Cambodia Resettlement and Reintegration) which conducted after the Paris Peace Accords
in 1993 (CARERE, 1996:1,3). By 2003, the Seila Program expanded its coverage area to 24

1
 
provinces which funded by numerous donors through co-funding. The expansion occurred
after the official decentralization and deconcentration reform started in February 2002 and
based on the commune administrative management law and commune councils election law,
then 1621 new local governments have initiated throughout Cambodia through election since
that time (COMFREL, 2007:6).

As in Seila (2000:37) decentralized planning system, it has been working to support and
develop the adoption of participatory planning institution including organization and
procedures and technical for the preparation of medium term development plan and yearly
budget investment program at commune and provincial level. The key identities of Seila
decentralized planning system are institutions of people’s participation in public decision
making and consultative mechanism between commune and provincial investment program.

As decentralization promotes local development and local governance through decentralized

commune development planning, two guidelines for Commune Development Planning (CDP)
and Commune Investment Plan (CIP) have been endorsed by Inter-ministerial Praks
(proclamation) (Ministries of Interior and Planning) for commune councils (decentralized
local government). First Prakas along with the guideline was released in 2001, which the
commune development planning consists of 11 steps and the second Prakas with guideline
endorsed in 2007, which commune development plan has been narrow to 5 steps, during the
second mandate of commune council’s election in 2007. Based on the second Inter-
ministerial Prakas (declaration) (Article 25, 2007), previous guidelines and Prakas
(declarations) in 2001 have been annulled. The guideline and Prakas present how local people
get involve in each step of commune development planning, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation (Inter-ministerial Prakas on CDP and CIP, 2007).

By 2005 the National Committee for Support to Commune/Sangkat (NCSC) of Royal

Government of Cambodia (2005:1-2) developed good governance for commune/sangkat
council’s hip pocket to guide commune councils to apply good governance at local level and
to enhance governance at this level. Thus, commune councils are required to apply good
governance principles. The hip pocket explains how the eight elements (participation, rule of
law, transparency, consensus oriented, equity, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability
and responsiveness) can be applied in development and administration of commune councils’
affairs. Good governance has been integrated into decentralization process through new local
government institutional structure and commune development planning, budgeting and
implements process which has been seen at the commune level and it built the credibility of
decentralized local government (Commune Councils) by improving accountability,
transparency, efficiency and effectiveness in its service delivery (World Bank, 20003:2). In
this regard, good governance has been mainstreamed into a commune development plan.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Decentralization has been recognized as the mean to achieve good governance (Yankson,
2007:379). As decentralization renders local governance (Wanyande, 2004:7), then the idea
of local governance has been regarded as a central part of local development strategy
(Bonfiglioli, 2003:17). In context of Cambodia, decentralization and deconcentration reform
started in February 2002 (Romeo, 2003:1) after almost a decade of pilot projects.
Decentralization is meant the devolution of authorities, position and responsibilities local
democracy to commune level (Seila, 2000:24). Promoting and enhancing good governance is
one of objectives of decentralization policy in Cambodia. Based on article 2 and 3 LAMC

2
 
(2002), commune is defined as a legal entity, and a system of local governance shall be
carried out at this level. However, it has been facing several impediments in this regard.

According to ADB (2000:71-73) there were fragmentation in local governance and

incomplete legal framework for local governance in Cambodia as decision making which
made by top officials in planning which is considered as the serious constraint in
decentralization reform. Moreover, NCSC (2005:96) and Pellini and Ayres (2007:404)
respectively found lack of truth in participatory local governance for the participatory and
democratic decision-making is yet well understood and internalized within the committee of
commune councils and as the result of low capacity of commune councils officials and local
people and lack of social mobilization and capital formation; and discouragement in
participatory local governance as local people accepted the decisions of their leaders without
any question. To some extent, commune councils have limitation of good governance
application because they tend to follow traditional and hierarchical decision making although
they understand the principles of good governance (NCSC, 2005:9). Lack of good
governance has been demonstrated to have adversely affected on the development process in
developing countries (Hop, 2009:79).

Pellini and Ayres (2007:405) claimed that spaces for civil society participation are not clearly
defined in the regulations. Besides, if there is participation, the people understand that it is
just to attend only (Sedara and Ojendal, 2007:41), thus participation planning was not so
effective. Decentralization law allows several spaces for village level representation and
participation in commune development planning process; particularly as the members of
Planning and Budgeting Committee (PBC). Nonetheless, the selection of the village
representatives in commune development planning process remains unclear. If there is
participation, it is inadequate as there is no incentive for those who are member of PBC. In
general, participation in commune development plan and commune investment plan (CDP
and CIP) is low as a few needs of local people are addressed (Vuthy and Craig, 2008:80). Not
only in during commune development process, Sotheary (2006:113) also asserted that
commune councils’ projects lack of participatory monitoring and evaluation. In addition,
World Bank (2004:58-9) demonstrates that the guideline and Prakas (declaration) on
Commune Development Planning (CDP) process does not indicate the scope for participation
in every step in the planning process of commune councils, and the meeting of PBC is not
suggested to open to neither public nor posting notice to motivate broader participation. The
Inter-Ministerial Prakas for broader public participation in the planning process is not known
by villagers, civil society organizations, generally, and or even commune councils
themselves. Thus, the inclusiveness and transparency of commune development planning
process is still matter. Not only the aspect from guideline of planning, officials who facilitate
the planning process from provincial and district lack of experience in enhancing local people
participation and community development (Charny, 1999:186). Based on these arguments the
participation in commune development planning and implementation is still problematic.
Similarly to Thailand case, Tambon Administrative Organizations (TAOs) can be corrupted
easily as the lack of local participation (Sopchokchai, 2001:9).

Accountability of commune councils toward citizen via commune development planning is

weak and difficult to establish, as there are many reasons behind this including commune
councils are likely to deal with plans and funds that are not reflected in commune investment
plan (CIP) (Rohdewohld and Porter, 2006:20), thus they created multiple accountabilities to
donors, NGOs, philanthropists, and political parties. In this regard, commune councils
increased the gear to meet the demand of external factors, hence formal commune planning

3
 
process and commune councils fund allocation rendered less significant overall
accountability to the electorate (Vuthy and Craig, 2008:93). In additional to Vuthy and Craig
assertion, Ayres (2001:61) claimed that commune councils are likely upward accountability
to their respectively political party rather than downward accountability (accountability to
citizens). The weaknesses of commune councils’ accountability are seen in the system of
above and below commune councils itself. The below itself is insufficient capacity to demand
for accountability from CCs by civil society, and the above itself is the support from
ministries were not offered to CCs on what they need, while the democratic decentralization
reform has been operated by CCs since 2002, the district and provincial authorities have not
yet organized their formal mandates (Sedara and Ojendal, 2007:46).

Transparency and accountability systems are inefficient in the area of public administrative
reform in Cambodia (Sokha, 2005:114). Commune council lacks of financial transparency as
many reasons including the collected fees are not accounted, the project costs are over
estimated; especially infrastructure project. Moreover, it is seen as well that the commune
councils lack of transparency regarding the selection of contractors for infrastructure project
implementation and how much amount of budget which received and how it has been spent
was not reported to and accessed by citizens (NCSC, 2005). Vuthy and CRAIG (2008:79)
argued that there are many cases are reported that commune chiefs have collusion with
contractors regarding the chosen type of project, contractors who award the contracts and the
cost of project and degree of quality control. This collusion was even supported by political
and other networking of elites at provincial level. Sotheary (2006:113) argued that limited
budget for commune development fund and the delay of commune councils fund transfer
from the central level of government and complicated financial management at commune
level leads to lack of transparency. Romeo and Pyckerelle, (2003:iv) add more that the cost of
commune councils’ project is lower than the reference price which calculated based on
average market cost and other cost incurred by other agencies, thus the commune’s project
failed to reflect the true cost of the work, which resulted in “cut corners’ and low quality
outputs. Moreover, commune chiefs are still unclear about their powers and their
responsibilities to stop payments when they found that contractors’ performance was
unsatisfactory. Hence, the endeavors of commune councils were not transparent as mentioned
in above causes. These problems are seen in the processes of commune development
planning; particularly during project cost estimation, procurement and monitoring and
evaluation process. As the case in Thailand, local government so called Tambon
Administrative Organization (TAOs) can be easily corrupted as the lack of transparency and
participation of local people; evidently, the relatives and friends of TAOs awarded the TAOs
contracts and the conflict of corruption was found in many places, and sometimes among the
TAO members (Sopchokchai, 2001:9)

Based on above statements, many aspects of local governance including low participation,
lack of transparency, weak accountability, and inclusiveness problem are found in the
commune development planning process and implementation. These have impacts on the
effectiveness of local development planning such as weak planning, planning does not reflect
to the local needs, poor accountability in planning, inefficiency cost and output of project, not
transparency in fund utilization and create collusion, inequity of the project, quantity and low
quality of the project output.

4
 
1.3 Research Questions

Based on the above issues and problems which are encountered by various stakeholders who
play as an important role in local development and local good governance, research questions
have been developed as follows.

• How local good governance concepts are applied in commune development planning
of decentralized local government in Cambodia? 
• What are the impacts of local good governance in decentralized commune
development planning? How?
• What are the factors explaining performance of decentralized commune development
plan in local good governance?

1.4 Research Objectives

The general objective of this research is to analyze the impacts of local good governance on
the performance of commune development planning of decentralized local government which
enhanced by NGOs and government in Cambodia.

The specific objectives are:

• To examine the applications of local good governance in commune development
planning;
• To assess the impacts of local good governance on the implementation of a commune
development plan;
• To gain the perception of local government and local people on the application of local
good governance in commune development planning;
• To explore factors explaining the applications of local good governance in commune
development planning;
• To suggest recommendations to strengthen local governance for effective commune
development planning in Cambodia and provide policy implications.

1.5 Rationale of the Research

Good governance has been perceived by the Royal Government of Cambodia as the pre-
condition to sustainable socio-economic development of the countries (RGC, 2004:6). Good
governance provides huge benefit to either local or national level. Think-tanks and policy
makers have notion that good governance is important for economic development. They
explored that high-quality institutions have the contribution, in a long run, to increase the per
capita incomes and promote growth around the world (World Bank, 2007:1). On the other
hand, there are limited empirical studies regarding the impact of local good governance on
performance of commune development planning; particularly institutional aspects of local
government. Although there are existing researches which have been conducted related to
good governance and aid, capacity, and poverty reduction, local good governance in
decentralized development planning is missing.

Recently, by using six principles of governance of Kaufmann et al’s (1999); such as voice
and accountability, political stability, government effectiveness, rule of law, control of
corruption and regulatory quality to measure the impact of aid on governance in Cambodia,

5
 
Ear (2007) found that aid has impact on only voice and accountability and political stability;
while another principles of governance were not impacted by aid.

Another findings related to participation for local governance of Penili and Ayres (2007)
which found out the community participation in local governance in Cambodia through
village networks. They found that village networks (small groups within the commune) took
imperative role to promote local governance, as the voice of villagers are heard by commune
councils through village networks and group representatives at the commune meeting,
planning and etc,. However, it can be done unless the village networks at grass root level
received trainings from external agents related to decentralization, roles of village networks
and good governance, which are the catalysts to motivate people to participate.

Holloway et al (2004:28), applied components of good governance of World Bank, found

around 80 per cent of respondents (include commune councils) understood what is good
governance and its important and benefits. Other than this finding, they found that 77 per cent
of correspondents believe that good management in development means more consultation in
development decision making between villagers and commune/sangkat official, and 84 per
cent of respondents think that good planning in development means planning that embodies
views, decisions and voluntary participation of the community effected by the planning,
while another 80 per cent viewed that planning that is clear and can be implemented. Thus, it
means that they understand the meaning of good governance, yet how it contributes to
commune development planning.

Finding from Sotheary (2006) showed that there was many conflicts in project prioritization
due to incompatible of local people’s ideas and interest, low participation of local people in
contribution, resource mobilization is limited due to the low well being to local people, CCs
and PBCs lack of commitment as uncertainty role in the implementation of decentralization
task, low salary and local government motivation. These lead to ineffectiveness and
inefficient commune development planning and implementation

Seneh (2000) found that the capacity building provided benefit to commune development
committee (CDC) and the capacity building of Seila Program was very effective and
successful. The CDC had high level of understanding and their performance and
responsibilities in decentralized planning. Capacity building of commune development
committee was influenced by education, income and gender factor. However, she found
several constraints related to capacity building of commune development committee
including low incentive, inappropriate schedule of training, insufficient resource person and
level of education CDC. In this regard, when the capacity building didn’t deliver effectively,
then it affected the efficiency and effectiveness of commune development planning.

From the above discourses on existing literatures, there were many findings related to good
governance in Cambodia from various authors and researchers, on the other hand, there were
very limited literatures on local good governance in decentralized commune development
planning, especially the study related to accountability, transparency, participation and
efficiency and effectiveness in local-level planning. Therefore, this research will provide an
insight on the impacts and applications of local good governance in decentralized commune
development planning, and to identify challenges and prospects of local good governance
application for future improvements.

6
 
The results from this empirical research could be utilized by many stakeholders; in particular,
INGOs and LNGOs, and local government (commune councils), district and provincial
councils; and in general, it will be used by the government; especially its development
programs that is related to local good governance strengthening, and decentralized commune
planning implementation; and other aid agencies and finance institutions. Ministries of
Interior and Planning can use key findings of this research for improving commune
development planning, as each commune is required to evaluate the effectiveness of
commune development planning in its mandatory. Governance quality can be used by both
government and aid agencies to measure the progress of development and as condition to
allocate fund to the commune. From this perception, it will contribute to the long term
development of Cambodia, as good governance lies on the heart of Royal Government of
Cambodia’s development strategy.

1.6 Conceptual Framework

The research will be focused on the study of the application of local good governance and its
impacts on the commune development planning.

The principles of local good governance are extracted from various sources; including
UNESCAP (2004), NCSC (2005b), which developed by the Royal Government of Cambodia,
and King Prajadhipok’s Institute (2005). Six principles of local good governance will be used
in this study; those are rules of law, participation, accountability, transparency,
responsiveness, and effectiveness and efficiency. As there are many definitions are given to
each principle, some of those, which reflect to the local good governance context in
Cambodia, are using in this research as follows.

Rule of law: Rule of law in local good governance is meant the ratification of legislation and
predominance of regular and just law and which the freedom, equity and right of all people
must be regulated and protected under the law (King Prajadhipok’s Institute, 2005:10). Under
this principle, legal framework means legal framework related to commune development
planning and implementation including law on commune administrative and management,
sub decree on commune fund, proclamation on commune development plan, commune
financial management guideline, decision on promulgation of the commune fund project
implement manual (NCSC, 2005b:8).

Participation: It meant in local good governance that the creation of opportunities for public
participation in politics and governance that entails decision making in various affairs,
including community resource allocations, what will mostly likely have impact on the
lifestyle and livelihood of the people. It is to be achieved through sharing data, giving
opinions and views, consultation, joint planning, joint implementation, as well as direct
controls by the people (King Prajadhipok’s Institute, 2005:10). It consists of joint decision
making which means people not just only present but makes decision in commune
development planning, participation in project implementation means local people participate
in providing information related to project implement and directly participation, and
participation in monitoring and evaluation which means participation in monitoring the
commune councils’ contract monitoring and progress of project implementation.

Accountability: It is meant in local good governance that the implementation of role, tasks in
the process of decision making and implement those decisions made and take responsibility
in all of their performances by reporting, explaining the reasons on those decisions made.

7
 
Accountability at commune level is for all stakeholders. Accountability is seen in two ways.
Upward accountability which commune councils are accountable to their leaders and donors.
Downward accountability which commune councils are accountable for the electorate and
public (NCSC, 2005b). Under this principle, commune councils accountable to local people
means the commune councils keeps reporting to citizen and evaluation on work performance
planning and implementation mean commune councils are responsible on the outcomes of the
project implementation and their performance in CDP, while role of PBC means that they are
accountable in their responsibilities in CDP and implementation.

Transparency: Transparency means that decisions taken and their enforcement are done in a
manner that follows rules and regulations. It also means that information is freely available
and directly accessible to those who will be affected by such decisions and their enforcement.
It also means that enough information is provided and that it is provided in easily
understandable forms and media (UNESCAP, 2004). Legal framework means the commune
councils make decision related to commune development in accordance to legal framework
such as procurement guideline, commune financial management manual, financial auditing in
each project, transparent in awarding the contract and contract payment and liquidation;
internal regulation which set by commune councils, information dissemination means
information as easily and open to access by public and must be simple and accurate which
easily to understand, and resources allocation means commune councils allocate resources for
CDP implementation in a transparency manner.

Responsiveness of CDP: In local good governance is meant that the effort of commune
councils’ institution and processes seek to serve all stakeholders equally regardless
discrimination within reasonable timeframe (UNESCAP, 2004, NCSC, 2005b:23). It consists
of three sub points; (i) time frame means the commune development plan implements to
address the need or problem and planning must be conducted within the time frame; (ii)
discrimination in planning means CDP of commune councils do not discriminate or is equity
among group of people or individuals within the commune; and (iii) local needs mean
planning matches and addresses the needs and problems of local people.

Efficiency and effectiveness of CCs and CDPs: In local good governance it is meant the
process and institutional management system in best use of resources at their disposal with
saving manner to produce high quality and quantity of outputs and able to provide optimum
benefits and to meet real needs of the community. It also covers the sustainable use of natural
resources and the protection of the environment (UNESCAP, 2004). Under this principle,
resource (finance) utilization and optimization in related to how commune fund is used in its
plan implementation and optimized outputs of the project and matching resource with local
problems and needs means the resources are used in the right priorities and urgent needs
which are considered as first priority and taken action in commune development planning by
whole community members.

The conceptual framework of this research is presented in Figure 1.1.

8
 
 Apply in the whole
process of CDPs
Rule of Law
• Related legal framework (CDP, Apply in stage 2, 6 and 7
Commune Fund, Project Implement of CDPs
Apply in the whole
Manual, Commune Financial
process of CDPs Management Guideline, M&E Participation
Effectiveness and Efficiency manual). • In decision making
• Resource utilization and • In implement
optimization • In Monitoring & Evaluation
• Matching resource with
local problems and needs
Local Good Governance
in Decentralized
Commune Development
Responsiveness Planning Accountability
• Plans match with local needs • Evaluation of work
• Time frame (scheduling) performance
• Equity and avoid • Accountable to electorate
discrimination in selection (local people) (downward)
Transparency
of beneficiaries
• Related legal framework (CCs • Role of PBC
finance manual, Auditing, Contract
Apply in stage 1, 2, 3and Payment) Apply in all stages of
6 of CDPs • Openly disseminated information CDPs
• Resource allocation

Apply in stage 3, 4, 5, 6
and 7 of CDPs

Figure1.1 Conceptual Framework of the Research

9
 
 

1.7 Scope and Limitations of the Research

Decentralized local government in this research is referred to commune or commune councils

who elected by their respective citizens. Hence, local good governance in this research is
defined as an institutional system which is a set of organization and procedural measures, for
managing local public affairs (Romeo, 2002:2) and development.

Principles of local good governance in this research are extracted from various sources, of
which are mostly extracted from the local governance framework designed for commune
councils which was developed by NCSC (2005b) of the Royal Government of Cambodia
including effectiveness and efficiency, transparency, accountability, participation,
responsiveness and rule of law. Under each principle of local good governance in commune
development planning, there are many sub-elements, and the research will be covering on the
following. Participation covers on the participation in jointing decision making,
implementation and monitoring and evaluation the plan and project of commune councils.
Accountability focuses on the planning that accountable to the local people, decision in
planning and implementation of the plan. Responsiveness includes the planning addresses the
needs of local people, responses to needs within the time frame and avoiding discrimination
in planning. Transparency covers legal framework, opened and disseminated information,
information is easy and accurate to access. Effectiveness and efficiency relates to resource
utilization, plan addresses the right priorities, and project cost estimation will be covering on
this research. Rules of law focuses on existing legal framework of commune development
planning, commune project procurement, commune fund, commune fund project implement
manual and commune project monitoring and evaluation.

The decentralized commune development planning in this research will be developed in a

combination between Commune Development Planning (CDP), which consists of five steps,
and Commune Investment Planning (CIP), comprising of five steps. Both CDP and CIP
guidelines was endorsed by Inter-ministerial (Ministries of Interior and Planning)
proclamation in 2007 which are contemporary being used by commune councils throughout
Cambodia. The combination of commune development plan consists of seven stages
including plan formulation, problems and needs identification and review; identify and select
priority development project, district integration, approve on commune development plan,
project implementation, and monitoring and evaluation. Each stage comprises of steps to be
undertaken which are explained in detail in chapter 2. The period of planning in this research
will be covering from 2007 to 2009, and all projects under this study are funded by only
commune council’s fund (CCF), while other projects which funded by NGOs and
development agencies are not considered. In 2007, it was the second mandate of commune
councils, and the first time that new commune councils started to develop their five years
plan and annual implementation plan.

Under this condition of this research, the impacts of local good governance application in
commune development planning will cover on institutional, social, and economic aspects.
Social aspect deals with equity as the result of participation, resources mobilization, benefits
to community and households and satisfaction of local people. Economic aspects focus on
efficiency in resources allocation/utilization and reduce corruption. Institutional aspects
include policy framework, rules and regulations and interaction of various government
agencies and NGOs that support the planning and implementation of commune development
plans.

10
 
 

The perception on local good governance will gain based on satisfaction of commune
councils, local people and concerned government agencies and NGOs on various aspects of
local good governance components applied in the commune development planning process.

The research will be undertaken at commune level, where two communes are selected;
namely, Khnash Romeas and Prey Khpos commune in Bovel district, Battambang province.
The communes will be purposively selected from in order to make comparison of local good
governance in CDPs which they have been experiencing. Khnash Romeas commune in Bovel
district, Battambang province is the commune that has been obtaining financial support for
local development and local governance application from the Royal Government of
Cambodia through various previous programs of CARERE I and II, Seila Program and
NCDD since 1996, while Prey Khpos commune has just experienced with the local
development and local governance fund from Royal Government of Cambodia’s programs
through Seila Program and NCDD since 2002 after the formal election of commune councils.
Thus these communes will be investigated for the comparison of local good governance
application in CDPs.

11
 
 

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
Eleventh sections are organized in this chapter. Concept of governance, principle of good
governance and actors in governance are given in the first, the second and the third sections
respectively. The impacts of governance in development are illustrated in the fourth sections.
Literature about decentralization and local governance, the concept of decentralization,
decentralized local government, decentralization and local governance in Asia are
respectively reviewed in the fifth, sixth and seventh sections. To bring broad concept into the
reality within the study area, governance policy, public administrative reform, local
governance performance of local government and decentralized planning and local
development in Cambodia are brought respectively into review of related literatures in the
eighth, ninth, tenth and eleventh sections, accordingly.

2.1 Concept of Governance

Governance jargon is being popular in development literature and development discourse

although it is not the new term in development as it has emerged in development issues since
late 1980s (CIDA, 1997:3). It has been used and debated in the different contexts and fields,
including corporate governance, international governance, national governance and local
governance (UNESCAP, 2004); field of development economic and urban study,
international institution, corporate studies, new political economy, political science and
economic studies (Barilettie and Zoli, 2004:316). Thus, governance has been defined based
on the contexts that they are referring to.

According to UNESCAP (2004), governance has been defined as the process of making
decision and the process by which the decisions are implemented or not implemented. While
another definition which is given by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) “as the
exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a nation’s affairs. It is
the complex mechanisms, processes, relationships and institutions through which citizens and
groups articulate their interests, exercise their rights and obligations and mediate their
differences. Governance embraces all of the methods-good and bad-that societies use to
distribute power and manage public resource and problems… wherein public resources and
problems are managed effectively, efficiently and in response to critical needs of society”
(UNDP, 1997:9). These are the definitions which defined by the United Nations body.
The followings are some contributions from financial institutes.

Asian Development Bank (ADB) defines the governance as is “the manner in which power is
exercised in the management of a country’s social and economic resources for development.
Governance means the way those with power use that power.”(ADB, cited in McCawley,
2005:2). Another meaning, World Bank (1992:3) defined the meaning of governance based
on the definition of Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary which released in 1979
and based on three distinct aspects: (i) the capacity of government to design, formulate, and
implement policies and discharge government function; (ii) the form of political regime; and
(iii) the process by which authority is exercised in the management of a country’s economic
and social resources for development. Based on these and the dictionary, World Bank
determines “the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s
economic and social resources for development” as the definition of governance (World
Bank, 1992:3).

12
 
 

According to the above definitions, mostly, governance has been seen as the process of
exercising for the management of a country’s affairs in terms of economic and social
resources for the development and it has also been attached another meaning of decision
making over economic and resources for development purposes.

2.1.1 Definitions of Good Governance

Since 1978, World Bank emerged the term called “good governance” due to un-international
standardized of management (Te, 2007:648). Governance embodies of good and bad
(governance) (UNDP, 1997:09) and the concept of good governance become popular in
1990s as it has been mainstreamed in the policy of international development agencies
(Parnini, 2006:189).

“Good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and
promoting development. By good governance is meant creating well functioning and
accountable institution-political, judicial and administrative” (UN Secretary-General, Kofi
Annanm, 1998, cited in Te, 2007:648). Good governance has therefore been identified as a
cornerstone of development strategy. But what does it mean by good governance? Many
definitions are defined by many development agencies, individual scholars and finance
institutions. The table below summarizes some definitions which defined by those.

Table 2.1 Various Definitions of Good Governance

Year Institution Definitions of Good Governance

ADB’s notion on good governance is focusing on the principles of
1995 ADB effective management. Those principles are accountability,
participation, predictability and transparency (P.04).
Good governance is the exercise of power by various levels of
1997 CIDA government that is effective, honest, equitable, transparent and
accountable. P03
Characterized as ‘transparent, participatory … accountable … effective
and equitable … promotes the rule of law … ensures that political,
1997 UNDP social and economic priorities are based on broad consensus in society
and that the voices of the poorest and the most vulnerable are heard in
decision-making over the allocation of development resources’ (p. 12)
‘Seven key governance capabilities: to operate political systems which
provide opportunities for all people … to influence government policy
and practice; to provide macroeconomic stability … to promote the
growth necessary to reduce poverty; to implement pro-poor policy; to
2001 DFID
guarantee the equitable and universal provision of effective basic
services; ensure personal safety and security …; to manage national
security arrangements accountably …; to develop honest and
accountable government …’ (p. 9)
Can be measured along six dimensions (voice and external
accountability; political stability and lack of violence, crime, and
2003 Kaufmann
terrorism; government effectiveness; lack of regulatory burden; rule of
law; control of corruption) (p. 5)
Democratic governance: ‘transparency, pluralism, citizen involvement
2005 USAID
in decision-making, representation, and accountability; focusing

13
 
  

Year InstitutionDefinitions of Good Governance

particularly on five areas: legislative strengthening, decentralisation and
democratic local governance, anti-corruption, civil-military relations,
and improving policy implementation’ (p. 1)
‘ensuring the rule of law, improving the efficiency and accountability of
2005 IMF
the public sector, and tackling corruption’ (p. 1)
Inclusiveness and accountability established in three key areas:
‘selection, accountability and replacement of authorities (voice and
World accountability; stability and lack of violence); efficiency of institutions,
(und
Bank regulations, resource management (regulatory framework; government
ated)
effectiveness); respect for institutions, laws and interactions among
players in civil society, business, and politics (control of corruption;
rule of law) (pp. 3, 7)
Source: Adapted Grindle (2007:556-7) and from various sources.

2.2 Principles of Good Governance

Many scholars, donor and development agencies, financial institutions and think-tanks
developed different indicators and elements of good governance to measure the quality of
governance based on their purposes and notions. From this perception, they believed that
good governance provides huge dividend, high quality of governance increases the income
per capita and encourage growth throughout the world in long run (World Bank, 2007). Key
indicators of governance which have been developed were used for the purpose of aid
allocation such as the study of Epstein and Gang, (2009), measuring democracy, services
delivery and its effectiveness and efficiency and corruption. Table 2 below illustrates the key
elements of good governance which are extracted from various organizations for a
comparative perspective.
Table 2.2Key Components of Good Governance
UN-OHCHR (2004)
UNESCAP (2004)

Dinesh (1998)
CIDA (1997)
AFDB(2004)
NSSD(2001)
ADB(1995)

Key Components

Accountability 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
• Transparency
3 3 3 3 3 3
• Available information
Participation 3 3 3 3 3
• Rule of law
• Legitimacy
3 3 3 3 3
• Predictability
• Legal and judicial framework
Responsiveness 3 3 3 3
• Effectiveness and efficiency
• Management effectiveness 3 3 3
• Value of money

14
 
 

UN-OHCHR (2004)
UNESCAP (2004)

Dinesh (1998)
CIDA (1997)
AFDB(2004)
NSSD(2001)
ADB(1995)
Key Components

Equity and inclusiveness 3 3 3

Combating corruption 3
Consensus oriented 3
Decentralized management 3
Human resource development 3
Local government 3
Management innovation 3
Networking 3
Public-private partnership 3
Strategic vision 3
Honest 3
Source: Author extracted from various sources.

Besides the above most common used key component of good governance, UNDP (1997:19)
determined the following characteristics of good governance.
• Service orientated
• Able to deal with temporal issues
• Regulatory rather than controlling, enabling and facilitative
• Able to define and take ownership of national solutions
• Accountable and transparent and efficient and effective in the use of resources
• Engenders and commands respect and trust
• Operates by rule of law
• Strengthens indigenous mechanism
• Able to mobilize resources for social purposes
• Tolerates and accepts diverse perspectives
• Able to develop resources and method of governances
• Promote equity, equality, sustainability and participatory
• Legitimate and acceptable to the people

2.3 Actors in Governance

Governance has been referred to all activities that undertaken by common interests. Common
interests are made unless the consensus decision making. UNESCAP mentioned that decision
making involves formal and informal actors in governance (UNESCAP, 2004). Based on
UNDP (1997:iii) governance actors are classified into three realms include private sector,
civil society and government. In contribution to governance these actors have different roles.

Table 2.3Roles of Actor in Governance

Actors Roles in Governance
Govern • Create a conducive political environment
ment • Decentralize administration and democratize the political system by

15
 
 

ActorsRoles in Governance
strengthening the financial and administrative capacities local government
• Empowering people by providing equal opportunities and assertion of the
inclusion of social, economic and political
• Protecting environment by ensuring social harmony, stabilizing macro-
economic, generate revenue to finance public services, infrastructure, health and
safety and regulating monopolies economic activities.
• Create job and expand employment according to economic development
• Improve livelihood by providing sufficient income according to productive
Private employment
Sector • Provide incentive and support the state privatization enterprises, improve small
and medium sized enterprise
• Expand their operation beyond the national boundaries that government can not
• Checks and balances on the power of government and on private sector, but also
contribute to strengthen both sectors
• Coordinate political and social interaction by mobilizing a numerous actors in
society to take part in social, economic and political
• Create society
• Monitor on natural resource and environment depletion, pollution, social
exploitation, which contribute to economic growth with equity within the
society
Civil
• Mitigate adverse impact of economic fluctuation
Society
• Represent and providing a voice for poor or vulnerable groups in decision
Organiz
making and political
ation
• Strengthening and protecting religious, culture, beliefs and values
• Help to solve market failures and weakness
• Strengthening marginalized household a greater purchasing power and abolish
middlemen transaction
Source: UNDP, 1997:15-18.

The challenge of governance is to balance between government, private sector and civil
society (Romeo, 2000:263, Miller, 2004:9) within national environment and within the global
communities and the consensuses appear as the crucial point for balancing in governance
(Miller, 2004:9). Miller (2004:10) mentioned that to establish consensus parliament centre
emerged ecology of governance in order to address the consensus, which diagramming the
interrelation between government sector, private sector and civil society and constitute active
citizen. This concept has given the balance between three sectors, while the unbalance
between three sectors is that the civil society and private sector are isolated from the
government sector (executive, judiciary and legislation) (Miller, 2004:12). To add more
arguments on the balancing and interaction between three sectors (Martin:1998:5), Institute
on Governance in Ottawa in 1997 (Institute on Governance Ottawa, 1997) defined additional
terms in each sector and developed the consensus and balancing terms as the result of
integrated response to various sectors.

Figure 2.1 below illustrates the interaction of these key actors on their governance
performance which was outlined by Miller (2004:9), Institute on Governance in Ottawa
(1997) and Parnini (2006:194) who conducted his research on civil society and good
governance in Bangladesh.

16
 
 

Sources: Adapted from Parnini (2006:194), Miller (2004) and Institute on Governance in
Ottawa (1997).
Figure 2.1: Main Actor in Governance and their Relationship

2.4 Impacts of Governance in Development

World Bank (1992:v) pays more attention on governance issue as it is considered as a matter
for sustainable and equitable development, and good governance has been identified as a
synonym of the development management by this institution. Enhancing quality of
governance is necessary for economic development (Sharma, 2007:29). Moreover,
development policy contemporary determined good governance as pre condition to achieve
development goal (Epstein and Gang, 2009:12). From this perception, the implications of
governance on economic, poverty and political aspects are discussed below

2.4.1 Economic

Economic governance is the endeavors of decision making that affect, both directly and
indirectly, economic manners of a nation and its influence on other economies. Economic
governance has influence on society issues, such as poverty, quality of life and social equity
(UNDP, 1997:10). World Bank (1992:1) mentioned that good governance is the centre
approach to foster equitable and strong development and it is needed to complement
economic policy sound. As governance involve three actors, government takes a major role in
public goods service deliver and they develop regulation for market efficiency and correct the
market when it fails. However, government needs capital to take these actions. In turn the
government needs accountability, reliable and adequate information and efficiency in those
capital or resource management and public good service delivery.

17
 
 

The good governance provides huge benefit to either local or national level. Think-tanks and
policy makers identified it as an imperative for economic development. They explored that
high-quality institutions, in long run, increase the per capita incomes and promote growth.
When the governance improved by a level, income increased about three times in long run
(World Bank, 2007:1).

Meisel and Aoudia (2008:4,12) conducted their verification by using the data from World
Bank Institute that the work of Kaufmann et al., 1999 mentioning that the good governance
has significant correlation with development of a nation. Findings concluded that there is
correlation between governance and level of development; however, there is no correlation
between it and the pace of development; especially from medium to a long term growth, as
there are changes behind the social, economic, institutional and politics.

Another notion believed that good governance facilitated the growth and enabling business
environment which leads to economic development. Governance impacts on the business
activities through taxation, rule of policy decisions, and economic. Policy implement relies
on the performance of public institutions; especially the bureaucracy manner. However, good
accountability structure may lead to good institutional endeavor. Hence, when other things
are performed well, it renders good business environment and attracts more investment which
leads to better growth (World Bank, 2003:77). Therefore, good governance is the main
attribution to economic growth.

2.4.2 Poverty

Empowerment of citizens by raising awareness to access to opportunity, social investment

and sustainable livelihoods are the attributions to poverty alleviation. Inequality and poverty
are matter of power, and it worsened poor governance which resulted from the marginalized
the poor from social, economic and political and unable to voice their voice to government.
Poverty can be broken by empowerment, social education and awareness of citizens’ rights
and responsibilities, access to justice as they can redress through grievances. Greater access
to education can eradicate poverty and inequality and empower poor in public decision
making (UNDP, 1997:77). Justice, participation, empowerment and social inclusion are
elements of governance, if these are enhanced it contributed to poverty alleviation.

ADB (1999:12) stated that quality of governance is essential for poverty alleviation. Good
governance rendered participation and pro poor policies and maintains transparency and
effectiveness public fund utilization and public service delivery and formulate rule of law.
Poor governance adversely affected poor people as they affected from the efficiency and
effectiveness of service delivery mad by government. It is realized that inefficiency,
corruption failed to anti poverty. To cope with these issues, enhancing government
accountability to the poor is needed and action to strengthen public expenditure management
and administration must be undertaken at national level to motivate pro poor growth and
social development. At the time being, devolution the basic public service delivery to the
lowest local government should be made; although it is found that local governments are
weak in this area, they should start from the basic education and primary health care and
gradually focus on poor empowerment, participation and accountability at local level. Not
only these, to reach poverty reduction goal, involvement diversified stakeholders is also
imperative.

18
 
 

2.4.3 Political

Political governance has been referred by UNDP as the decision making and policy
performance of a state. The State consists of independent legislative, judicial and executive
body. Developing countries are reforming the political institution by seeking the updated
governance modalities and strengthen the capacity of political to guide social and economic
activities to achieve sustainable human development (UNDP, 1997:10). Thus, governance
and political are interlink together.

As political stability and absence of violence is a dimension of governance indicators, which

defined by Kaufmann, Kraay, and Mastruzzi (2004), as “perceptions of the likelihood that the
government will be destabilized or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means,
including political violence and terrorism” (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Mastruzzi, 2006:4). From
this perception, Worldwide Governance Indicators used it to evaluate the quality of
governance of individual country and compare with other countries; hence it increased the
competitiveness to improve governance. The outcome of governance of individual country
has been used by donor agencies, international financial institutions and other bilateral donor
agencies to make decision on their policies formulation and explicitly tie aid allocation. In
this regards, governance influence political endeavor of individual country; especially
political stability of Algeria, Angola, Libya, Rwanda and Sierra Leone has significant
improvement during 1998-2006 as a result of governance indication measurement (World
Bank, 2007:2).

2.5 Concept of Decentralization

In 1981, Rondinelii differentiated four types of decentralization forms, that is,

deconcentration, delegation, devolution, and divestment or privatization. Deconcentration is
meant the transfer power from central government to specific lower tier of government.
Delegation is meant the transfer power to sub national government. Devolution is meant the
transfer of authorities and power to elected sub-national government entities. Divestment is
meant the transfer or delegate power to business sector (Rondinelii, 1981, cited in Rondinelii
et al, 1984:10-26, Parker, A.N, 1995:19).

Decentralization has been seen in three dimensions, that is, political, fiscal and institutional or
administrative dimensions (Parker, 1995:23). Administrative/Institutional decentralization,
which consists of deconcentration, devolution and delegation, aims to redistribute authority,
responsibility, financial resources for public service delivery to different tiers of government.
Political decentralization aims to provide citizens to elect their local leaders, and those who
they elected represent them and have more power in public decision making. Financial/fiscal
decentralization; financial resources are needed to cover the cost of public goods and other
services delivery (Parker, 1995:23-35). The financial resources can be generated from
external sources, including central government grant and borrowing from lending entities;
and local revenue through local taxation, rental, administrative fee, and other public
enterprise (Sundaram, 1997:37).

However, it is claimed that there is no exact formula for decentralization, as it depends on the
context of specific country and decentralization is built upon the expected outcomes of those
countries (Smoke, 2000:19). On the other hand, decentralization has been defined the
meaning of different things according to different scholars, it means that “the transfer of
planning, decision-making, or administrative authority from the central government to its

19
 
 

field organizations, local administrative units, semi-autonomous and parastatal

organizations, local government or non-governmental organization”, while the most
imperative objective of decentralization is to reduce overwork and complication, enhance
efficiency and effectiveness of government’s service delivery to fulfill the needs of citizen for
the purpose of development (Rondinelli, 1981, cited in Rondinelli and Cheema, 1983:18).

Based on the meaning and forms of decentralization, decentralization seems to create other
entities of government which are accountable to national government. By this mean, lower
government take responsibilities in lower tires governance.

2.6 Decentralized Local Government

Local government has been referred to a particular entities or institutions formulated by a

national constitutions, which is seen in Brazil, France, India, Japan, Italy, and Sweden); by a
state constitutions which applied in Australia and the United States; ordinary legislation of
the higher level of central government such as New Zealand, the United Kingdom (most
countries); by provincial or state legislation such as Canada and Pakistan; or by executive
order like China in order to deliver a range of particular services to a small area (World Bank,
2006:1). Based on this assertion, local government is rendered when the state applied the
decentralization policy. Within the decentralization concept, it derives sub national
government which varies from one country to another based on their decentralization and
deconcentration policy. Table 4 below illustrates sub national government tires in Asia.

Table 2.4 Levels of Local Government in Asia

Country Sub-national level of government
Two levels:
- Provincial administrative and municipalities which divided into districts and
Cambodia Khans
- Elected commune and sangkat (urban) which divided into villages
Four levels:
- Provincial, autonomous regions and large cities
China - Prefectures and cities
- Counties
- Township
Three levels:
- Provinces, special regions and capital city
Indonesia - Local governments: kotamadya (cities) and kabupaten (district)
- Desa (village)
Four levels:
- Provinces
Philippines - Cities
- Municipalities
- Barangays (villages)
Four levels:
- Provinces
Thailand - District/municipalities
- Tambons (sub district)
- Villages
Three levels:
- Provinces and municipalities
Vietnam - Districts
- Communes
Source: White and Smoke, 2005:2.

20
 
 

2.7 Decentralization and Local Governance in Asia

2.7.1 Decentralization in Asia

Decentralization has emerged in the debate since 1970s when the development paradigm
changed from growth pole to redistribution with growth to fulfill the basic minimum needs to
the grass root. On the other hand, decentralized planning started in India since 1951s
(Sundaram, 1997:23). Before 1990s most East Asian countries were highly centralized and
adopted decentralization later than the countries in some parts of the world. Governments
adopted decentralization process is matter as it impacts on other interrelated fields, including
economy, governance, and service delivery (White and Smoke, 2005:2). Moreover, there
were two factors that drove decentralization in East Asia; those include structural factors and
political factors. Structural factors; East Asia countries’ economic growth and urbanization
were the reason behind decentralization process. It was seen that there was rapid urbanization
in Philippine, Thailand, China and Indonesia, although Cambodia and Viet Nam urbanized
slower, as the increasing of population. Linking between economic growth and demographic
creates conducive decentralization reform in East Asia. Political factors; democratization
triggered the decentralization reform, such as Philippine and Indonesia took on
decentralization reform after the failure of dictatorship power. But it was not happened in
Viet Nam and China. However, grass root demands for good government and participation
derived decentralization reform (Ibid: 4).

2.7.2 Decentralized Local Governance in Asia

In last two decades, financial support on local governance and decentralization has been
turned into the international development agencies and co-operation interest (OECD, 2004:9).
There are many literatures discourse about the relationship between decentralization and local
governance. It is revealed that decentralization makes possible to foster development through
local self governance (Omiya, 2000:197), while another scholars mentioned that
decentralization eases local governance (Wanyande, 2004:7). Moreover, Parker and Serrano,
(2000:3), and Nikolov (2006:05) asserted that decentralization has widely asserted as
imperative tool and factor to constitute good local governance and encourages development
at local level. As decentralization is the process of transferring authorities, responsibilities,
decision making on resources, for the purpose of services delivery to grass root people, from
national government to lower government (local government), thus local governance
rendered when governance has been applied in local government. In the period of 1990s,
decentralization was a mean to open governance to motivate public involvement, from this
regards, governance emerged in the concept of decentralization (Cheema and Rondinelli,
2007:3), that is, decentralized local governance.

Decentralization Local Good Governance

Better Service Delivery Better Governance Quality

Source: Adapted from Romeo (2000).
Figure 2.2: Decentralization towards Local Good Governance and Services Delivery

By providing enabling environment that decision making and services delivery are brought
closer to local citizen, decentralization and local governance are indentified as the foundation

21
 
 

of democratic governance. Process of transferring powers, responsibilities, resources and

functions from national government to local government has been commonly identified as
decentralized governance. From the view of organizational, decentralized governance is
meant as a process of reorganizing the authority to enhance the effectiveness and overall
quality of governance system, and to build the capacity of sub national authority.
Restructuring authority can be seen in terms of co-responsibility between and among tiers of
governance, central, regional and local. From the top level of authority to local level,
decentralized governance supports regulation (legal), financial and administrative for the
purpose to empower citizen and organizational aspect at local level. Besides, UNDP defines
decentralized governance as the interaction of balancing responsibilities and authorities
between national government and other tiers of government, civil society organizations and
the local entities’ ability to implement the responsibilities which have been transferred by
using participatory approach. Decentralized governance is used to build up governance at
local level for better public service delivery, and as an instrument for promotion democratic
and poverty reduction; especially, in developing countries in Central Asia (Nikolov, 2006:3-4).
Another important aspects of decentralized governance in enhanced and efficient service
delivery are have been seen as follows: decentralized governance rendered the participatory
management of development, decentralized finance for local service delivery, cooperation
among local government, monitoring and evaluation of service delivery in decentralized
governance, human resources development and building the capacity in local governance
performance, and also building public trust (Nikolov, 2006:3).

Another term which similar to decentralized governance is local governance derives from the
concept of decentralization process, as mentioned elsewhere in this section that
decentralization creates local governance. World Bank (2006:1) defines local governance the
collective action which formulated and executed at local tier; therefore, it conserves self-
governing communities. UNDP (2004:4) argued that procedure, process and institution are a
set of local governance. These can be seen when grass root people and collective group
articulate their needs and interests and their right was exercised. Reorganizing local
governance institution needs the consensus on the following principles to achieve citizen-
centre local governance which presents in Figure 2.3 below.

Source: Andrews and Shah, 2005, cited in World Bank, 2006:22

Figure 2.3: Dimension of Citizen-Centre Local Governance

22
 
 

2.7.3 Local Good Governance in Asia

Many literatures shared that decentralization is the pre condition to achieve good governance,
as good governance involves the sharing power between national and sub national
government (Oyugi, 2000:v). Local good governance is therefore defined as a set of
mechanisms/ procedures and a set of organizations intended to manage local public affairs
(Reomeo, 2002:2, Bongfiglioli, 2003:18). The very concept of ‘good governance’ at local
levels indicate the quality, effectiveness and efficiency of local administration and public
service delivery; the quality of local public policy and decision-making procedures, their
inclusiveness, their transparency, and their accountability; and the manner in which power
and authority are exercised at the local level (Bonfiglioli, 2003:18). This is illustrated in
Figure 2.4 below.

Exercising Power and Authority Effectiveness and Efficiency

Quality Participation
Local Good Governance
Transparency Partnership

Performance Inclusiveness Accountability

Sources: Reomeo, 2002:2 and Bongfiglioli, 2003:18.

Figure 2. 4: Local Good Governance Principles

Local good governance is not providing local services but also preserving liberty and quality
of residents, creating space for participation and civic dialogue, enabling environment for
local sustainable development and supporting market-led and facilitating outcomes that
improve the quality of life of residents (World Bank, 2006:02).

2.8 Governance Policy in Cambodia

The Royal Government of Cambodia (2004:6) perceived good governance as the main issue
for sustainable economic development, equity and social inclusion. Over the recent years,
good governance in Cambodia is enquired by many external and internal actors in
development politically and administratively; however, governance in Cambodia has not yet
been proved that is good and acceptable (Te, 2007:55). Moreover, Sokha (2005:114) and
(Pak and David, 2008:79) evaluated that governance in Cambodia is still weak and
hierarchical. To achieve the good governance, Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC)
developed Governance Action Plan (GAP) which comprises of short, medium and long-term
action plans to be formulated. The RGC identified key areas of governance action to be
reformed in the near and medium terms for further improvement (RGC, 2004:1).

As the government recognized that certain cross cutting areas are inevitable actions to
achieve merit of good governance in Cambodia. Five cross-cutting areas: (i) legal and judicial
reform through the establishment of basic rules of fairness and predictability; (ii) public
finance by providing the financial support through all activities of government which taken
place, (iii) public administrative, decentralization and deconcentration reform as it determines

23
 
 

the effectiveness of government and its employees in undertaking the public program; (iv)
anticorruption which is regarded as a cross-cutting area of actions that establish the
framework of behavioral rules that set standards of probity in economic, social and political
life; (v) gender equity which is regarded as the serious area to achieve poverty eradication
and social justice of government. They are summarized in Figures 2.5 below.

Governance Reform

Legal and Public Administrative Public Finance Anti-

Judicial Reform Reform Reform corruption

Legal Reform Public Administrative Customs

and Decentralization Administration
Reform

Decentralization and Tax and

Local Governance administrative
Reform
Budget
Management
 
Source: RGC, 2004.
Figure 2. 5:Governance Reform in Cambodia

2.9 Public Administrative Reform in Cambodia

Public administrative reform or administrative reform is lying as one of the among other
importance elements of governance reform and governance action plan of the RGC and in its
rectangular strategy. The RGC developed National Public Administrative Reform (NPAR) in
1999 in other to address the issue and to continue building the capacity of civil service and
maximize the functioning of public administrative. NPAR emphasizes mainly on civil service
and public services by building and enhancing service delivery, enhancing of administrative
payment including salaries reform and employment, building the capacity of institution and
people and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) promotion. Apart from these,
decentralization and deconcentration which is known as local democracy and critical
structure of government and territorial organization, is also acknowledged as the objective of
NPAR. In 1999, Councils for Administrative Reform (CAR) was established in order to
coordinate, implement and supervise administrative reform (Natacha, 2006:4). As public
administrative reform and governance action plan are interrelation policy of Royal
Government of Cambodia (Figure 2.5), Figure 2.6 illustrates a possible structure of public
administrative reform and its enabling environment.

24
 
 

 
Source: Natacha, 2006:4.
Figure 2. 6: Public Administrative Reform and Good Governance in Cambodia

2.10 Local Governance Performance of Decentralized Local Government in Cambodia

Local governance performance can be measured based on its components which mentioned in
the section 2.7 in this chapter, some of those are brought into discussion in the context of
local government in Cambodia.

Partnership, it has been found that positive cooperation with NGOs occurred at all tires of
government (NCSC, 2005:32). CC development plans have been financed by provincial line
departments and INGOs and LNGOs. NGOs provided capacity building on the topic related
to planning, human right, advocacy, gender awareness and domestic violence, and they also
cooperated with CCs during planning process. In some provinces meeting conducted among
NGOs (NCSC, 2007:82). In local development context, commune councils partnered with
other development agencies, especially NGOs and CBOs which have been made through
agreements with CCs during the district integration process. Rather than these, CCs follows
Public-Private Partnership (PPP) by out sourcing their infrastructure projects through
procurement process as specified in CCs Fund Project Implement Manual (PIM) (NCDD,
2009b).

Accountability, it is found that CCs have been improved its accountability to the electorate if
compare with previous commune authority which controlled by one party during 1980s. CCs
fulfilled a numbers of promises and plans, although those were mostly related to
infrastructure, it improved accessibility of local people to other services. On the other hand,
accountability of provincial authorities to CCs is hindered as there is gap of planning and

25
 
 

implementation coordination between line department and the CCs. CCs are unable to
express their satisfaction and dissatisfaction to those provincial authorities. Consequently, it
has hindered the services accountability to local people (COMFREL, 2007:17).

Participation, citizen participation at commune level is increasing, especially numbers of

citizens to poll because they aware of and satisfy with the performance of CCs. NGO is a
factor to improve participation of local people in CCs’ affairs (COMFREL, 2007:24).
However, the participation in commune development planning is low and the effectiveness of
participation is still in question mark as the citizen just only to present and participate (Sedara
and Ojendal, 2007).

Quality, effectiveness and efficiency of services delivery by CCs, variety of public services
are delivered including voter registration, civic registration and social and local development
services, especially infrastructure (COMFREL, 2007). Allocative efficiency and productive
efficiency was used to measure the quality of service delivery by Romeo and Luc (2003).
Generally, citizens were satisfied the output of the planning resource allocation and the
anticipate advantages from commune projects (roads, irrigation and schools) reflect the needs
of those. Yet, from the allocative efficiency terms, there was inadequate attention on
maintenance and sustainability of those projects. From the productive efficiency, the cost of
commune’s project was lower than the reference prices based on market average cots and
cost incurred by other agencies. Thus, it did not reflect the actual cost of the project, and
resulted in low quality outputs.

Exercising power and authority; in the past commune authority decision was influenced by
upper government tires, recently decision making of CCs was taken by discussion and
majority vote. However, the commune chiefs have had influence over the decision making
among the CCs. Rather than this, councilors from minority parties were not able to express
their ideas and views, and their decisions opposed the majority party (NCSC, 2005: 109,
COMFREL, 2007:18).

As governance of decentralized local government in Cambodia has been promoted since

2002, when formal decentralization reform started, there have been many positive changes if
compared to former commune authorities before 2002, as mentioned above, on the other
hand, there were some remain limitations to be improved. The improvement is being
conducted through capacity building, new regulations formulation and enforcement such as
organic law.

2.11 Decentralized Planning and Local Development in Cambodia

2.11.1 Decentralized Planning in Cambodia

Decentralized planning in Cambodia is seen in terms of Commune Development Plan (CDP)

and Commune Investment Plan (CIP), which rendered participatory bottom-up planning.
Based on proclamation of Inter-ministerial (Ministries of Interior and Planning) in 2002 and
CDP and CIP guidelines in 2003, the commune councils’ development plan and investment
plan consists of 11 steps which promulgated during the first mandate of commune councils
election in 2002. On the other hand, it was found that both of CDP and CIP were
complicated, time consuming and beyond the capacity of commune councils (NCSC,
2005:34, Sotheary, 2006: iii) as these are reported by CCs. At the mean time of second
mandate of election in 2007, proclamation and provision of guidelines on CDP and CIP have
been redesigned and promulgated to address the above concerns. Based on second

26
 
 

proclamation of Inter-ministerial (2007), CDP consists of 5 steps and CIP consists of 5 steps
as well, which ease commune councils to develop its own CDP and CIP respectively (see
annex 7 and 8).

A CDP is a 5 year strategic development plan of CCs in each mandates, while the CIP is the
annual action plan of CCs. Thus, at the beginning of its mandate, each commune is required
to set a development strategic planning framework which to be achieved within 5 years. In
each CDP and CIP, CCs; especially, budgeting and planning committee should consider any
issue to achieve Cambodia Millennium Development Goal (CMDG), comprising of
following (Inter-ministerial proclamation on CDP and CIP for 2007, these are:

• Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger;

• Achieve universal primary education;
• Promote gender equality and empower women;
• Reduce child mortality;
• Improve maternal health;
• Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases;
• Ensure environmental sustainability;
• Develop a global partnership for development; and
• Move towards zero victims and a country without mines;

Certain modifications between the CDP and CIP (see details in Annex 1) have been made to
set a framework for this research, the newly developed CDP for this research consists of
seven key stages. Each planning stage consists of certain steps which are presented in Table
2.5 and Figure 2.7 respectively.

Table 2. 5: Commune Development Planning Process Applied in Research

CDP Stages
1. Plan formulation
2. Identification/Review problem
and needs
3. Identify/select priority
development project
4. District integration
5. Approve on commune
development plan
Steps
PBCs draft development framework and budget
2.1 PBC hold a meeting at commune level to review
local problems, needs, constraints and solutions
2.1 PBC hold a meeting at village level where
villagers are invited to participate
3.1 Based on the results from step 2, select projects
to be implemented in the current year
3.2. Select project in priority to present at a district
integration workshop
4.1. CCs present the current year projects and
previous year outputs
4.2. Get comments from participants (NGOs, civil
society, government line department, etc).
4.3. Make temporary agreement
5.1. List the plan to be funded by commune fund and
others
5.2. Meeting to give comments among participants
(CCs, DFT, PBC, etc)
5.3. Approve CDP and dissemination the approval
result

27
 
 

CDP Stages Steps

6. Development project Non- infrastructure
implementation 6.1. Identify implementation partners and make
agreement
6.2. Implementation
Infrastructure
6.1. Site study
6.2. Design and cost estimation
6.3. Procurement
6.4. Contracting
6.5. Implementation
7. Monitoring and Evaluation Monitoring
(M&E) 7.1. Formulate M&E committee
7.2. M&E focal person assists CCs for monitoring
7.3. Site monitoring and reporting
7.4. Follow-up
Evaluation
7.5.Existing M&E committee select projects to be
evaluated
7.6. Field evaluation
7.7. Reporting and dissemination
Source: Modification and Compiled from Prakas (Declaration) on Commune Development
Planning

28
 
 
Stage 1: Plan formulation
Stage 7: Monitoring - PBC draft development
and Evaluation (M&E) framework and budget

Monitoring Stage 2: Identification/Review

Step 7.1: Formulate M&E committee
Step 7.2: M&E focal person assists CCs for monitoring problems and needs
Step 7.3: Site monitoring and reporting Step 2.1: PBC hold a meeting at commune level to
Step 7.4: Follow-up review problems, needs, constraints and solutions
Evaluation Step 2.2: PBC hold a meeting at village level where villagers
Step 7.5: Existing M&E committee select projects to be are invited to participate
Evaluated
Step 7.6: Field evaluation
Step 7 7: Reporting and dissemination Stage 3: Identification/Select
priority development project
Step 3.1: Selected the project to be implemented in the
Stage 6: Development current year based on results from stage 2
project implementation Step 3.2: Select project in priority to present at district
integration workshop
Non-infrastructure
Step 6.1: Identify implementation partners and make
agreement Stage 4: District integration
Step 6.2: Implementation
Infrastructure Step 4.1: Commune chief presents the current year projects
Step 6.1: Site study and previous year outputs
Step 6.2: Design and cost estimation Step 4.2: Get comments from participations
Step 6.3: Procurement Step 4 3: Make temporary agreement
Step 6.4: Contracting
Step 6.5: Implementation
Stage 5: Approve on
commune development plan
Step 5.1: List the plan to be funded by commune fund and
others
Step 5.2: Meeting to give comments among participants
  Step 5.3: Approve CDP and dissemination the approval result
Source: Adapted from CDP and CIP (2007)
Figure 2. 7: Commune Development Planning Cycle Applied in Research

29
 
 

2.11.2 Local Development

To align with the development strategy of RGC, many local and international NGOs are
developing and implementing various projects to support decentralization and deconcentraton
reform, and enhancing local governance through local development or local development
fund, apart from nation programs of Royal Government of Cambodia. To promote local
development and general responsibilities for local administrative, commune has its own fund,
so called commune fund (CF), which disburses from central government (Article 2, Sub
decree on Commune Fund, 2002:2). The fund is used based on commune development
planning in each year.

Recently, decentralization and deconcentration reform is coordinated by the National

Committee for Sub-national Democratic Development (NCDD) that is the inter-ministerial
body which consists of 10-12 Ministries/Institution. NCDD is currently implementing many
projects related to local development and enhance local governance which funded by various
aid agencies and finance institutes (co-fund). Under technical support from the Project to
Support Democratic Development through Decentralization and Deconcentration (PSDD),
NCDD is working to support local governance and local development in 24 provinces and
support for planning and implementation of the commune/Sangkat 1,621 commune/Sangkat
councils. NCDD is running various projects to meet its objectives with amount of fund as
follows (PSDD, 2009:18).
The NCDD development program and resources 2009 are presented in the Table 2.6 below.

Table 2. 6: NCDD's Development Program and Resources 2009

Fund/Project Title Province Budget 2009 ($) %
Royal Government of Cambodia 24 26,143,902 31.53
World Bank-Rural Investment and Local Governance 23 19,500,000 23.51
World Bank- Land Allocation for Social and Economic
3 3,222,167 3.88
Development (LASED)
World Bank, Demand for Good Governance, One Window One
9 727,303 0.87
Service
International Fund for Agricultural Development-Rural Poverty
2 1,840,101 2.21
Reduction Project (IFAD-RPRP)
International Fund for Agricultural Development-Rural
3 1,226,384 1.47
Livelihood Improvement Project (IFAD-RLIP)
DANIDA/UK/NRML (Natural Resources Management and
10 7,073,000 8.53
Livelihood)
EC-UNDP-DDLG (Democratic Development and Local
10 3,458,332 4.17
Governance)
UNICEF-SK (Seth Koma) 6 3,552,933 4.28
UNCDF-IDLD (United Nation Capital for Development Fund-
2 804,000 0.97
Innovation for Decentralization Development)
CANADA 3 443,720 0.53
Others (ADB’s Commune Councils Development Project,
Tonle Sap Sustainable Livelihood Initiative, USAID/PACT
24 14,025,867 16.91
Local Administration and Reform Project, UNFPA, GRET and
Ausaid)
Subtotal 24 65,844,948
PSDD 24 17,065,000 20.58
Grand Total 82,909,948 100
Source: PSDD, 2009:18.

30
 
 

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN
This chapter composes of five sections. First describes the type of research and design while
the second focuses on the selection of the study area. Section of CCs members and villagers
are explained in the third sections. Data collection sources and methods and data analysis and
technique are explained in the fourth and the fifth sections of this chapter respectively.

3.1 Type of Research and Research Design

This research is an exploratory type aiming to explore the applications of local good
governance principles in CDPs, to find out the relationship between the applications of local
governance principles and its impacts. This research will be conducted based on a
combination of a case study and a survey design applying both quantitative and qualitative
approaches.

Case studies will be conducted in order to examine specific aspects of local governance from
CDPs in the two communes. Case studies will be conducted at two levels, that is, at the
applications of commune level on local governance in CDPs and other type of case studies
will be focused on the selected development projects of CDPs both infrastructure and non-
infrastructure projects in order to analysis plan implementation, management and quality as
result of the application of local good governance

A survey design will be applied to gather information related to the perceptions on local good
governance in CDPs, views on the impacts of local good governance in CDPs in terms of
institutional, economic and social aspects, and feedback of respondents on applications and
improvements of local good governance for the effectiveness of CDPs.

3.2 Selection of the Study Area

Decentralized local development planning and local governance at commune level have been
seen two phases in Cambodia. First phase has started since 1996 when local development
planning has been emerged at commune level initiated by local development fund project of
the UNCDF and implemented its pilot project in Banteay Meanchey and Battambang
provinces in association with CARERE (Cambodia Rehabilitation and Regeneration) in order
to assist returnees from the border camps (CARERE, 1995 cited in Demaine and Pongquan et
al, 1997). In the later years the project expanded to other provinces which named CARERE
II, Partnership for Local Governance (PLG) and Seila Program and it financed by various
donors. However, these projects did not cover all communes in all provinces. Second phase
started after 2002, based on experiences and competencies of previous pilots project in local
development planning, Royal Government of Cambodia (RCG) started implementing its
formal decentralization policy in 2002 and commune councils within 1621 communes
throughout Cambodia were elected (COMFREL, 2007). The elected commune councils have
been involving local development by formulating local development plan and the plans have
been financing by commune fund of RGC since 2002 until now.

As mentioned in above context, two communes with longer and shorter experience in
performing commune development plan (CDPs) are selected respectively. In this respect, it is
believed that the longer experienced decentralized local government is able to apply local

31
 
 

good governance more effectively in the CDPs than the commune with relatively shorter
experience. Therefore, the commune will be selected based on following criteria:

• A commune that has been obtained financial support from government program through
commune fund or local development fund since 1996.
• Another commune that has been obtained financial support from government program
through commune fund or local development fund after 2002.

Based on the above criteria, Prey Khpos and Khnash Romeas communes of Bavel district,
Battambang province will be purposively selected as these communes fit the first and second
criteria of this research respectively (Map 3.1).

Based on Demaine and Pongquan et al report in 1997, Khnach Romeas commune was the
only commune that implemented local development planning and has obtained the financial
support since 1996. Prey Khpos commune has just implemented commune development plan
and obtained financial support after formal election in 2002.

Prey Khpos commune consists of 10 villages and Khnach Romeas commune consists of 8
villages of Bovel district in Battmbang province located in the northwestern part of
Cambodia, near the border of Thailand. These communes are about 40 km from the central
province of Battambang and approximately 330 km from the capital of Phnom Penh. The
majority of residents within these communes are engaging in seasonal farming and rice
cultivation and other small business with Thai people.

Source: JICA GIS Database (2003)

Map 3.1: Map Showing the Study Area of Khnach Romeas and Prey Khpos Communes

32
 
 

3.3 Selection of CCs Members and Sampled Households

Selection of CCs members, PBC members, M&E committee members, procurement

committee and villagers will be elaborated in this section which composes of two sub
sections.

3.3.1 Selection of CCs Members

All CC members will be all selected as the whole populations, Planning and Budgeting
Committees (PBCs), Monitoring and Evaluation committee, procurement committee and
other committees will be purposively selected. Therefore, 18 CCs including commune chief,
first and second deputy commune chief, 47 PBCs members, 11 M and E committee members
9 procurement committee and 2 clerks will be interviewed. Figure 3.1 illustrates the selection
of commune councils members based on commune administrative structure.

All related commune council’s members and commune clerks will be interviewed on issues
related to local good governance applied in CDPs. PBC members will be partially collected
information related to planning and budgeting at commune level while procurement
committee and M and E committee will be asked information related to procurement and
bidding process, and outcome of infrastructure project, respectively.
Elected members Appointed
members
(2) Commune

Second Deputy First Deputy

Commune Chief (2) Commune Chief (2)
2 Clerks
12 Councilors (6 Khnach Romeas and 6 Prey Khpos)

47 PBC (22 Khnach 11 M and E 9 Procurement Other Committees

Romea and 25 Prey committee Committees
Khpos) (6 Khnach Romeas (5 Khnach Romeas
and 5 Prey Khpos) and 4 Prey Khpos)
Source: Adapted from Pellini (2007) and Mansfield, C. et al (2004)
Figure 3. 1: Structure of Selected Communes and its Population to be interviewed

3.3.2 Selection of Sampled Households

The six focused villages have approximately 1394 households that majority CDP projects
have undertaken and concentrated during the last one to three years will be selected
purposively as sampled villages. The purposive sample selection of these six villages is also
due to limited budget and time of this research. Therefore, Ta Man, Dangko Pen and Boeung
Chan Neang villages among other 10 villages of Prey Khpos commune will be purposively
selected and around 43 sampled households from these villages will be randomly selected
and interviewed, and Prey Sangha, Balung Leu and Balung Meanchey villages among other

33
 
 

10 villages of Khach Romeas commune will be purposively selected, and 50 sampled

households from these villages will be randomly selected and interviewed. Thus, totally 93
sampled households will be selected for interview in this study. Figure 3.2 illustrates the
sampling procedures and methods applied in this research

Province
(Battambang)

District
Purposive
(Bavel)
sampling

Commune 1 Commune 2
(Prey Khpos) (Khnach Romeas)

Village 1 Village 2 Village 3 Village 1 Village 2 Village 3

Ta Man Dangko Pen Chan Neang Prey Sangha B. Mean Chey Balung Leu
(14 sampled HHs) (19 sampled HHs) (10 sampled HHs) (27 sampled HHs) (8 sampled HHs) (15 sampled HHs)
 

Simple Random }}}}}Sampled

Total
Sampling Households 93

Figure 3.2: Sampling Procedures and Methods

The number of sampled households were calculated based on Yamene’ (1967) formula. The
sample size in each village is presented in table 3.1 below.

‫ۼ‬
࢔ൌ
૚ ൅ ‫ۼ‬ሺࢋሻ૛

Where n = Sampled households

N = Total household of six villages (1394)
e = Standard of deviation (0.10)

Table 3.2: Sampled Households

Total
Commune Village % Sample Size %
Household
Prey Sangha 406 29.12 27 29
Khnach
Balung Leu 230 16.50 15 16
Romeas
Balung Meanchey 118 8.46 8 9
Ta Man 210 15.06 14 15
Prey Khpos Dangko Pen 280 20.09 19 20
Boeung Chyan Neang 150 10.76 10 11
Total 6 villages 1394 100 93 100

34
 
 

3.4 Data Sources and Data Collection Methods

The research will be undertaken based on both secondary and primary data sources. Tools to
be used for gathering information from both sources are elaborated as below:

3.4.1 Secondary Data

The secondary data will be collected from various sources which are reliable and valid
including journals, existing CDP and CIP document, commune database, commune profile,
procurement documents of CCs, NCDD program reports, PDRC reports, district and
provincial development plans, research papers and evaluation reports which conducted by
domestic and international consultants, researchers, research institutes and theses. Rather than
these, decentralization and deconcentration and local governance policy documents, laws
related to CCs, Prakas (declaration) and guidelines will be collected from NSCS, NCDD and
Ministry of Interior. Details on secondary data collection are presented in Annex 2.

3.4.2 Primary Data

Primary data is an imperative for this research, thus it will be collected from several
informants including primary beneficiaries (households), village development committee
(VDC) as member of PBC, village headperson, CCs, commune clerks and other committees
within the communes administrative, district facilitators, district councils, NGOs, PRDC
officers, and NCDD staff. Several methods will be applied in this research consisting of
followings.

a) Reconnaissance Survey

A reconnaissance survey will be conducted to get a sampling framework on key villages so

that a sampling design can be play practically and to finalize a framework and details of
sampling design to identify key informants and villagers to be interviewed. This survey will
explore types of projects under CDPs to be investigated in a depth study of each commune.

b) Field Observation

Observation will be conducted during the field survey, a few infrastructure and non
infrastructure projects will be observed in depth. CCs, PBCs, meetings, field monitoring and
evaluation of M & E committee will be observed on their on-going activities in order to
figure out the following aspects:
• Quality of infrastructure projects
• How technical monitoring is conducted by district technical support officer, CCs, and
M and E committee at the project site
• How CCs meetings are organized and discussed
• On-going activities related to participation in project implementation
• How villagers contributed local resources that is organized by selected committee or
CCs
• Ways meeting are organized and discussed at village and project site, if they are free to
express and exchange ideas
• What are the communication channels for information dissemination
• How bidding are organized and practice

35
 
 

c) Key Informants Interview

By using a checklist of questions, key informants who tentatively identified below will be
interviewed to get their views in local good governance practices. The government officers
including 1 PRDC Officer, 1 district council and 1 district facilitator, and 2 NCDD staff who
are mostly known as an advisor to decentralization and deconcentration, will be interviewed
regarding the applications of local good governance in CDPs, and its impacts on institutional
and economic aspects, strengths and limitation of local good governance applications and
policies related to local governance issue in CDPs. 1 LNGOs and 1 INGOs staff will be asked
on their involvement in local good governance applications and practices in CDPs in terms of
transparency, effectiveness and efficiency, impacts of applications on social and economic
aspects, factors affecting local good governance applications in terms of institutional aspect
and their perceptions on the current local governance applied by CCs including strengths and
limitations. Moreover, commune chief and clerk who are considered as an important key
informant will be interviewed related current local good governance applications,
constraints/problems in the application in their respective commune (See Annex 3).

d) Questionnaire Survey

A standardized questionnaire is developed for a face-to-face interview with CCs, PBCs,

M&E committee, procurement committee and other committees within the commune in order
to collect both qualitative and quantitative information. The questionnaire will be divided into
two sets (A and B). Set A will be designed for CCs, PBCs, M & E committee; procurement
committee and other committees within the commune administrative. Set B will be designed
for households who are the primary beneficiaries of commune’s projects.

Set A is designed for CCs members including PBC including VDC as member, M& E
committee and procurement committee. This set consists of information regarding profile of
respondents, respondents’ understanding of local good governance components and
applications in CDPs, perception of local good governance in CDPs in terms of degree of
satisfaction and degree of usefulness, factors affecting the applications of local good
governance in CDPs and problems and constraints of local good governance in CDPs.

Set B is designed for sampled households. It consists of information related respondents’

profile, involvement of local people in CDPs in terms of participation in decision making
including project selection and resource allocation, in implementation and in M & E, the
benefits in response to their problems and needs from CDPs, impacts on social and economic,
perceptions on the applications of local good governance in CDPs of CCs, their feedbacks on
local good governance in CDPs and CDP performance of CCs.

Both sets of questionnaires are shown in Annex 4 which will be translated from English into
Khmer.

e) Focus Group Discussion

Focus group discussion will be conducted using a checklist of guiding questions (Annex 5).
Two different groups discussion will be arranged.

Group A, at commune level, a commune chief, 3 PBC members, 3 M & E committee, 2

procurement committee and other committee of commune administrative in each commune

36
 
 

will be conducted in order to discuss on the impacts of local good governance in institutional,
economic and social aspects, and strengths and limitation on planning and implementations
of CDPs from the perspective of local good governance and recommendations on local good
governance for the strengthening the effectiveness and efficiency of CDPs. It will be
conducted in each study commune.

Group B, at village level, a group consists of a village headperson, a VDC member, 4

representatives of primary beneficiaries from non-infrastructure and infrastructure projects, 2
representatives of vulnerable groups including gender and other user groups of each
commune administrative will be discussing on participation, transparency, responsiveness,
and effectiveness and efficiency and its impacts by the application on their economic aspects
and their feedbacks on these components in CDPs.

3.5 Data Analysis and Technique

The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) and Microsoft EXCEL will be used to
process and analyze data to be obtained from a survey questionnaire.

3.5.1 Weighted Average Index (WAI)

Based on a Likert’s five-social scales to be developed in assessing perception of CC members

and from sampled households. The measurement on the perception will be developed to
assess various aspects of local good governance including:

• Degree of understanding
• Degree of satisfaction
• Degree of influential factors

All of above five-social scales of all above consist of the following:

Very low Low Moderate High Very high

0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00

Thus the following formula will be applied for the degree of understanding and usefulness
according to Maih (1993):

WAI = [{fVL(0.2) + fL(0.4)+ fM(0.6)+ fH(0.8)+ fVH(1.0)}/N]

Where: WAI = Weighted Average Index

fVH = Frequency of very high
fH = Frequency of high
fM = Frequency of moderate
fL = Frequency of low
fVL = Frequency of very low
N = Total number of observation (respondents)

The perception of local people and local government on the degree of satisfaction on local
good governance applied in CDPs will be measured as below.

37
 
 

Strongly Strongly
Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied
dissatisfied Satisfied
-2 -1 0 1 2

The following formula will be applied according to Maih (1993):

WAI = [{fSDS(-2) + fDS(-1) + fNe(0)+ fS(1) + fSTS(2)}/N]

Where: WAI = Weighted Average Index

fSTS = Frequency of strongly satisfied
fS = Frequency of satisfied
fNe = Frequency of neutral
fDS = Frequency of dissatisfied
fSDS = Frequency of strongly dissatisfied
N = Total number of observation (respondents)

3.5.2 Quantitative Analysis

The following statistical applications will be applied.

a) Descriptive Statistics

It will be used to describe profiles of CCs, CIPs and CDPs of CCs and sampled households. It
will be analyzed by using percentages, frequency, cross-tabulation, graphs, charts and other
illustrations.

b) T- test

It will be applied to test the statistical similarities and differences of means of two communes
in terms of the perception of the CCs and villagers on the degree of satisfaction, usefulness,
understanding of local good governance applied in CDPs and degree of influential factors.
The test will be applied based on the WAI values.

3.5.3 Qualitative Analysis

This will be applied to analyze the performance of various aspects of local good governance
of the two selected communes, the specific commune development project in details and to
examine, explain the application of local good governance in CDPs and its impacts.

a) Case Studies

As the research will be primarily focusing on qualitative data, case studies will be conducted
on CCs of two selected communes and specific project of CCs will be selected as case
studies.

A comparison between two case studies on the CCs of the selected two communes will
conducted in order to compare the applications of local governance aspects in CDPs of the
communes which have respectively experienced with decentralization and support from
government program since 1996 and 2002 on rules of law, participation, accountability,
transparency, responsiveness and effectiveness and efficiency.

38
 
 

Multiple case studies will be conducted on the specific CDP projects of both selected
communes on infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects to analyze:

• Participation by focusing on the participation in decision making, implement,

monitoring and evaluation, local people contribution in terms of cash and labour, and
operation and maintenance the projects.
• Accountability by covering on roles and responsibilities of each committee within
commune, technical support officer and contractor in project implementation.
• Transparency which will be covered on dissemination and sharing information about
the project to public, process of project procurement and the dissemination the result of
bidding for infrastructure project, procedures of payment to contractors and reporting
about how budget has been spent in each project.
• Responsiveness by focusing on the whether the project matches the local people
problems and needs and it has been implemented within the time frame, and the project
benefits to local people and community as a whole.
• Effectiveness and efficiency will be covered on quality of the project, output of the
project in comparison with cost, using time efficiently in project implement and long
term thinking on natural resource use in project implement.

From the above elements of local governance analysis in specific project studies, strengths
and limitations within those studies projects will be identified. Three successful infrastructure
projects including culvert, wells and village earth road or laterite road, and three non-
infrastructure projects including rice bank, cow raising and health education will be selected
for case studies. Secondary data will also be collected for case analysis regarding project
documents of commune councils (See Annex 7).

b) Qualitative Statement

This will be applied in order to analyze the qualitative statement on the perceptions, views,
opinions of respondents (CCs, local people and key informants) and group discussion, and to
explain the applications of local good governance in CDP and how it is applied. and factors
affecting the application and relationship.

c) SWOT Analysis

It will be conducted in order to analyze strengths and limitations of the practices of local
good governance at commune level by focusing on CDPs of the two selected communes
under the study. In this respect; factors facilitating and or constraining the implementation of
local good governance in the CDPs performed by CCs can be identified.

The research design framework is depicted in Figure 3.3

39
 
 

Research Problems/Issues

Research Questions and

Objectives

Conceptual Framework

Literature Review

Research Design

Selection of - Selection Data Collection Methods and Research

Study Area of CCs Data Sources Coordination
members Schema
and
villagers
- Key
informants Primary Data Secondary Data
- Reconnaissance - Journals
- Field - Theses
observation - NCDD reports
- Key informant - PDRC reports
interview - NGOs reports
- Questionnaire - CDC and CIP
survey documents
- Focus group - Research papers
discussion - Seila reports
- Decentralization and
Deconcentration policy

Data Entry and Processing

Findings, Interpretations and Analysis

Applications Impacts of Perception of CCs and Factors

of LGG in  LGG in Local People on LGG in Explaining
CDP CDP CDP LGG in CDP

Conclusions and Recommendation to Strengthen Local Governance in CDP

Figure 3.3: Research Design

40
 
 

References
ADB (1995). Governance: Sound Management, Asian Development Bank, Manila,
Philippines.

ADB (2000). Enhancing Governance for Sustainable Development in Cambodia, Asian

Development Bank, Manila, Philippine.

Asian Development Bank [ADB] (1999). Fighting Poverty in Asia and Pacific: The Poverty
Reduction Strategy, Asian Development Bank, Manila, Philippine. Available at
http://www.adb.org/Documents/Policies/Poverty_Reduction/Poverty_Policy.pdf

Ayres, D.; (2001). Decentralization: Report from Review of Literature, Commune Councils
Support Project (CCSP), Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Barilettie, A., and Zoli, M. (2004). On Concepts of Governance: A Survey and Interpretation,
Turin, Italy.

Bonfiglioli, A. (2003). Empowering the Poor: Local Governance for Poverty Reduction,
United Nations Capital Development Fund (UNCDF), New York, United State of
America.
CARERE (1996), CARERE Work Plan 1996, Phnom Penh, Cambodia, retrieved on 20 June
2009 at http://mirror.undp.org/carere/database/carlib/docs/Wpl/CAR/000025.pdf

Charny, Joel R.; (1999). Issues for Decentralized Planning and Financing of Rural
Development, Regional Development Dialogue, Vo. 20(2), pp.176-192

Cheema, S.G, and Rondinelli, D., (2007). Decentralizing Governance: Emerging Concept and
Practice, Washington DC, USA.

COMFREL (2007). Assessment of First Term of Decentralization in Cambodia: Commune

Performance and Citizen’s Participation: 2002-2007, COMFREL, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia.

Councils for the Development of Cambodia (2004). Practices and Lessons Learned in the
Management of Development Cooperation: Case Studies in Cambodia, Government-
Donor Partnership Working Group Sub-Working Group No.3, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia. Retrieved on 20 June 2009 at http://www.cdc-
crdb.gov.kh/cdc/practices_chapter8.htm

Crook, R. and Manor, J. (2008). Democracy and Decentralization in South Asia and Wes
Africa. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Ear. S (2007), The Political Economy of Aid and Governance in Cambodia, Asian Journal of
Political Science, 15:1, pp.68-96.

Epstein, G.S and Gang, I.N (2009). Good governance and Good Aid Allocation, Journal of
Development Economics 89 (2009), pp. 12–18.

41
 
 

Grindle, M.S.; (2007). Good Enough Governance Revisited, Development Policy Review, 25
(5), pp. 553-574
Hope Sr. K. R (2009). Capacity Development for Good Governance in Developing Societies:
Lessons from the Field, Development in Practice, 19:1, pp 79-86

Institute on Governance Ottawa (1997). The Governance Cooperative Map, Institute on

Governance Ottawa, Canada. Available at
http://www.iog.ca/publications/capmap_eng/intro.html#figure1

Kato, T., Kaplan, J. and et al (2000). Cambodia: Enhancing Governance for Sustainable
Development, Working Paper 14, Cambodian Development Research Institute (CDRI),
Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A and Mastruzzi, M., (2006). Governance Matter V: Aggregate and
Individual Governance Indicators for 1996-2005, World Bank.

Martin, I.S. (1998). Bulding a Learning Network on Governance: The Experience of the
Governance Cooperative, Institute on Governance, Ottawa, Canada.

McCawley, P. (2005).Governance in Indonesia: Some Comments, Asian Development Bank

Institute, Tokyo, Japan.

Meehan, E., (2003). From Government to Governance, Civic Participation and ‘New
Politics’; the Context of Potential Opportunities for the Better Representation of
Women, Occasional Paper No. 5, Queen's University Belfast, United Kingdom.

Meisel, N., and Aoudia, J. O., (2008). Is “Good Governance” a Good Development
Strategy?, Agence Française de Développement, Paris, France.

Miah, A. Q. (1993). Applied Statistics: A Course Handbook for Human Settlement, Asian
Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand.

Miller, R. (2004). The Ecology of Governance and Parliamentary Accountability. In

Parliamentary Centre and World Bank Institute: Parliamentary Accountability and
Good Governance: A Parliamentarian’s Handbook, Parliament Centre of Canada and
World Bank Institute, pp. 05-15. Available
athttp://www.parlcent.ca/publications/pdf/sourcebooktext.pdf.

Natacha, K.; (2006). Public Administrative Reform in Cambodia: An Absolute Condition to

Support Development and Alleviate Poverty, Economic Institute of Cambodia, Phnom
Penh, Cambodia.

NCSC (2005b). Good Governance for Commune/Sangkat Councils, Department of Local

Administrative, Ministry of Interior, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

NCSC [National Committee for Support Commune/Sangkat] (2005a). Review of

Decentralization Reform in Cambodia: Policy and Practices, NCSC, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia.

42
 
 

Nikolov, D. (2006). Decentralization and Decentralized Governance for Enhancing Delivery

of Services in Transition Conditions. This paper is offered as a background paper for
the Regional Forum on “Enhancing Trust in Government through Leadership Capacity
Building”, to be held in St. Petersburg on 28-30 September 2006. Retrieved on 20 June
2009 at http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan025134.pdf

OECD (2004). Lessons Learned on Donor Support to Decentralization and Local

Governance, DAC evaluation series, France.

Omiya, P.J., (2000). Citizen Participation for Good Governance and Development at the
Local Level in Keyna, Regional Development Dialogue, 21(1), pp 194-213

Pak, K.; and David, C.; (2008). Accountability and Public Expenditure Management in
Decentralized Cambodia, Cambodia Development Resource Institute, Working Paper
38, Phnon Penh, Cambodia.

Parker, A. and Serrano, R., (2000). Promoting Good Governance through Social Funds and
Decentralization, The World Bank.

Parker, A. N., (1995). Decentralization: The Way Forward for Rural Development?, Policy
Research Working Paper, World Bank, Agriculture and Natural Resources
Department-Sector Policy and Water Resources Division, Washington DC, USA.

Parnini, S.N. (2006), Civil Society and Good Governance in Bangladesh, Asian Journal of
Political Science, 14:2, pp. 189-211.

Project to Support Democratic Development [PSDD] (2009). Annual Work Plan and Budget
2009, National Committee for Management of Decentralization and Deconcentration
Reform, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Robinson, M. (2003). Participation, Local Governance and Decentralized Service Delivery.

Retrieved on 20 June 2009 at www.ids..ac.uk/logolink/resources/MRobinson.htm

Rohdewohld, R. and J. Porter, D. (2006), Independent Study of Donor Support for

Decentralization and Deconcentration (D&D): Contributing to Democratic
Development, Options for Future Donor Support to Decentralization and
Deconcentration, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Romeo, L. (2000). Systems Experimentation in Support of Decentralization Reforms:

Reflections on Local Development Funds. In Kammeier, H.D and Demaine, H., Ed:
Decentralization Local Governance and Rural Development, Proceedings of the
International Workshop on Decentralized Planning and Financing of Rural
Development in Asia, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand.

Romeo, L.; (2002). Local Governance Approach to Social Reintegration and Economic
Recovery in Post Conflict Countries: Towards a Definition and Rational, United
Nations Capital for Development Fund, New York.

43
 
 

Romeo, L.G. and Spyckerelle, L.(2003). Decentralization Reforms and Commune-Level

Services Delivery in Cambodia, Asian Development Bank, Asian Development Bank
Institute, United Nations Capital Development Fund, Manila, Philippine.

Rondinelli, D.A. and Cheema, G.S (1983). Implementing Decentralization Policies: An

Introduction. In Cheema, H.S and Rondinelli. D.A (Ed): Decentralization and
Development: Policy Implementation in Developing Countries, USA.

Rondinelli, D.A. and Nellis, et al, (1984). Decentralization in Developing Countries: A

Review of Recent Experiences, World Bank Staff Working Papers No. 581, World
Bank, Washington, USA.

Royal Government of Cambodia (2000). Seila Program Document 2001-2005, Seila Task
Force, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Royal Government of Cambodia (2004). Rectangular Strategy for Growth, Employment,

Equity and Efficiency in Cambodia, Royal Government of Cambodia, Phnom Penh,
Cambodia.

Royal Government of Cambodia (2006). Strategic Framework for Decentralization and De-
concentration Reforms, Royal Government of Cambodia, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Royal Government of Cambodia (undated). Governance Action Plan. Retrieved on 20 June

2009 at www.adb.org/CARM/gap.pdf

Rusten, C., Kim, S., Eng, N., & Pak, K. (2004). The Challenges of Decentralization Design in
Cambodia, Cambodian Development Resource Institute, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Sedara, K. and Ojendal, J.; (2007). Where Decentralization Meet Democracy: Civil Society,
Local Government, and Accountability in Cambodia, Cambodian Development
Resource Institute, Working Paper 35, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Seneh, S.; (2000). Capacity Building Assessment in Decentralized Planning in Cambodia: A

Case Study in Battambang Province, Master Thesis, Asian Institute of Technology,
Bangkok, Thailand.

Sharma, S.D. (2007). Democracy, Good Governance, and Economic Development, Taiwan
Journal of Democracy, 3(1), pp. 29-62

Smoke, P., (2000). Understanding Decentralization in Asia: An Overview of Key Issues and
Challenges. In Kammeier, H.D and Demaine, H., Ed: Decentralization Local
Governance and Rural Development, Proceedings of the International Workshop on
Decentralized Planning and Financing of Rural Development in Asia, Asian Institute
of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand.

Sokha, P., (2005). Decentralization and Poverty Reduction in Cambodia: Experience and
Challenges, Regional Development Dialogue, V26 (2), pp 114-120.

Sopchokchai, O.; (2001). Good Local Governance and Anti-corruption through People's
Participation: A Case of Thailand

44
 
 

Sundaram, K.V., (1997). Decentralized Multilevel Planning: Principles and Practices, Asian
and African Experiences, New Delhi, India.

Te, S. (2007). Good Governance in Cambodia: Exploring the Link between Governance and
Poverty Reduction, Yokohama National University, Japan. Retrieved at
http://kamome.lib.ynu.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10131/3127/1/4-Te.pdf

Transparency International (2006). National Integrity Systems Transparency International

Country Study Report Cambodia, Berlin, Germany.

UNDP (2004). Decentralized Governance for Development: A Combined Practice Note on

Decentralization, Local Governance and Urban/Rural Development, UNDP.

UNESCAP (2004). Concept of Good Governance, UNESCAP, Bangkok, Thailand. retrieved

on 03 July 2009
http://www.unescap.org/pdd/prs/ProjectActivities/Ongoing/gg/governance.pdf

UNESCAP (2008). Statistical Yearbook 2008 for Asia and the Pacific, UNESCAP, Bangkok,
Thailand.

UNESCAP (2009). Economic and Social Survey of Asia and the Pacific: Addressing Triple
Threats to Development, UNESCAP, Bangkok, Thailand.

UNDP (1997). Reconceptualising Governance: Discussion Paper 2, Management

Development and Governance Division, Bureau for Policy and Programme Support,
United Nations Development Programme, New York.

UNDP (1998). Decentralized Governance Monograph: A Global Sampling of Experience,

Management Development and Governance Division, United Nations Development
Programme, New York, USA.

Wanyande, P., (2004). Decentralization and Local Governance: A Conceptual and

Theoretical Discourse, Regional Development Dialogue, 25(1), pp1-13.

White, R. and Smoke P., (2005). East Asia Decentralizes. In East Asia Decentralizes: Making
Local Government Work, World Bank, Washington DC, USA.

World Bank (1992). Governance and Development, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

World Bank (2003a). Project Appraisal Document on the Proposed Credit to the Kingdom of
Cambodia for a Rural Investment and Local Governance project, World Bank East
Asia and Pacific Region.

World Bank (2003b). Better Governance for Development in Middle East and North Africa:
Enhancing Inclusiveness and Accountability, World Bank, Washington DC, USA.

World Bank (2004). Cambodia at the Crossroads: Strengthening Accountability to Reduce

Poverty, World Bank East Asia and the Pacific.

45
 
 

World Bank (2006). Local Governance in Developing Countries, World Bank, Washington
DC, USA.

World Bank (2007), A Decade of Measuring the Quality of Governance: Governance Matters
2007, Worldwide Governance Indicators, 1996-2006, Annual Indicators and
Underlying Data, World Bank, Washington.

Yamene, T.; (1967). Elementary Sampling Theory, Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Yankso, P. W. K (2007). Decentralized Governance, Access to Social Services and Poverty

Reduction in the Gomoa District in Ghana, International Development Planning
Review, 29:3; pp.379-412.

Cristina Mansfield, C; et al (2004). Commune Councils and Civil Society: Promoting

Decentralization through Partnership, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

Penili, A. (2007). Decentralization Policy in Cambodia: Exploring Community Participation

in the Education Sector, PhD Dissertation, University of Tampere, Finland.

Demaine, H., Pongquan, S., and et al (1997), Local Development Fund, Battambang and
Beanteay Meanchey Provinces: Report on the Monitoring of the Main Phase Local
Planning Process October 7-18, 1997, United Nations Capital Development Fund and
Asian Institute of Technology (AIT).

46
 
  

Annex I: Research Coordination Schema

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
CCs and sampled households

Demographic • Age
• Gender
• Marital status
• Education
CC members

• Position in the commune

- CC chief
- Deputy commune chief
Characteristic - Clerk
- PBC members (VDCs and villager headperson) • Questionnaire
s of CCs and • Descriptive
Social/situation - M and E committee - CCs
households statistics
al - Procurement Committee - Households
- Women and children committee
• Members of local organization within the commune
• Duration of working within commune
Sampled households

• Duration of involvement in CDPs (CIPs)

• Duration of living within the commune
• Member of any group or CBOs
CC members and sampled households
Economic
• Annual income
• Occupation
1. To examine 1.1 CCs • Training course on related topics: • Questionnaire • Descriptive
the capacity - Local (good) governance, - CCs statistics
47
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
application building on - participatory governance, • Qualitative
of local local good - planning and management statement
good governance - Civil society and networking
governance Rules of law:
in commune
development • Separation of power and roles • Secondary data
planning - CC roles
- PBC roles
- Procurement committee roles • Focus group discussion
- M and E committee roles - CCs
• Qualitative
• Clear rules and procedures enforcements
statement
- Laws related to planning, budgeting, and M and E
1.2 Local good • Descriptive
Participation:
governance statistics
principles • Sharing information to inside/outside agencies (types, • Questionnaire • WAIs for social
applied in frequency and channel) - CCs scaling on degree
CDP • Exchanging view with inside/outside agencies
of application
(very low, low,
• Use of media/civil society in giving information • Questionnaire
moderate, high and
• Willingness of CCs to listen to opinion - Households
every high)
• Ways of involvement in CDPs
• T-test
- Indirect participation through PBC, Procurement, and
M and E committee
- Direct participation in decision making,
implementation, M and E, and operation and
maintenance

48
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
Accountability

• Execution of responsible individuals or groups or • Questionnaire

committee in various tasks assigned in CDPs guidelines - CCs
- PBCs execute their responsibilities
- Procurement committee execute their responsibilities
- M and E committee execute their responsibilities
• Evaluation of work performance of various committees
in responsible for CDPs
• Managing and resolving conflict
- With other committees
- With local people
Transparency • Questionnaire
- Households
• Information dissemination and sharing to public
- Project identification
- Financial report
- Bidding procedures and results
• Financial monitoring of accounting system • Questionnaire
- External audit - CCs
- Internal audit
Responsiveness:

• Matching of CDPs with local problems and needs • Questionnaire

• Time frame (scheduling) of project - Households
• Equity and avoid discrimination in selection of
beneficiaries by involvement of vulnerable group/people)
Efficiency and effectiveness: • Questionnaire
- CCs
• Using time efficiency and effectively in CDPs

49
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
• Technical and financial support to CDPs
• Resource utilization and optimization
• Capacity of CCs and technical support staff
• Quality of development projects • Questionnaire
- Households
• Rules of law • Key Informant Interview • Qualitative
• Participation - CCs statement
1.3 Understandi • Transparency • Questionnaire • Descriptive
ng of local • Accountability - CCs statistics
good • Efficiency and effectiveness • WAIs for social
governance • Responsiveness scaling on degree
in CDP of understanding
(CCs and (very low, low,
PBCs) moderate, high and
every high)
• T-test
2. To assess • Increased capacity building in planning, implementation • Questionnaire
the impacts and management of CDPs - CCs
2.1 Institutional • Qualitative
of local • Strengthening, coordination and relationship of local
aspects statement
good people, NGOs, CCs, PBC and technical support staff
from district and provincial levels • WAIs for social
governance
scaling on degree of
on the • Strengthening participatory approach and bottom up
impacts (very low,
implementat development planning
low, moderate, high
ion of a • Increasing equity in project involvement and beneficiate • Questionnaire and very high)
commune 2.2 Social of vulnerable groups and individuals - Households
• T-test
developmen aspects • Changing attitude and satisfaction of local people to CCs
t plan and planning

50
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
• Strengthening social networking and communication • Questionnaire
channel of CCs and district/province and CCs with civil - CCs
society (people and NGOs) • Key informant interview
- NCDD and PRDC
- District facilitator
- District councils
- NGOs
• Increasing unity • Questionnaire
• Reducing local conflict - CCs
• Optimization of resource allocation to project • Focus group discussion
- CCs
• Local contribution and resource mobilization • Questionnaire
- Households
2.3 Economic
aspects
• Transparency financial management system • Questionnaire
(dissemination and accessible financial report) - CC
• Reducing corruption • Questionnaire
• Quality of project in comparing with cost (cost effective) - Households
• Increasing income and employment of local people
3. To gain the 3.1 Perception Rules of law: • Qualitative
perception on statement
• Separation of power and roles • Secondary data
of local satisfaction • Descriptive
- CC roles
government of CCs and statistics
- PBC roles
and local local people
- Procurement committee roles • Focus group discussion • WAIs for social
people on on local - CCs scaling on degree of
- M and E committee roles
the good satisfaction
• Clear rules and procedures enforcements
application governance (strongly dissatisfy,
- Laws related to planning, budgeting, and M and E
of local components dissatisfy, neutral,
Participation:
good applied in satisfy and strongly
governance CDP • Sharing information to inside/outside agencies satisfy)

51
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
in commune process - Types of information • Questionnaire • T-test
developmen - Frequency of sharing information - CCs
t planning - Channels of sharing information
• Exchanging view with inside/outside agencies
• Use of media/civil society in giving information
• Willingness of CCs to listen to opinion • Questionnaire
• Ways of involvement in CDPs - Households
- Indirect participation through PBC, Procurement, and
M and E committee
- Direct participation in decision making,
implementation, M and E, and operation and
maintenance
Accountability

• Execution of responsible individuals or groups or • Questionnaire

committee in various tasks assigned in CDPs guidelines - CCs
- PBCs execute their responsibilities
- Procurement committee execute their responsibilities
- M and E committee execute their responsibilities
• Evaluation of work performance of various committees
in responsible for CDPs
• Managing and resolving conflict
- With other committees
- With local people
Transparency • Questionnaire
- Households
• Information dissemination and sharing to public
- Project identification
- Financial report
- Bidding procedures and results

52
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
• Financial monitoring of accounting system • Questionnaire
- External audit - CCs
- Internal audit
Responsiveness:

• Matching of CDPs with local problems and needs • Questionnaire

• Time frame (scheduling) of project - Households
• Equity and avoid discrimination in selection of
beneficiaries by involvement of vulnerable group/people)
Efficiency and effectiveness: • Questionnaire
- CCs
• Using time efficiency and effectively in CDPs
• Technical and financial support to CDPs
• Resource utilization and optimization
• Capacity of CCs and technical support staff
• Quality of development projects • Questionnaire
- Households
• Policy, legal and institutional framework of CCs in • Focus group discussion • Qualitative
relation to CDPs on local good governance - CC statement
4. Factors • Coordination mechanism CCs, district, provincial levels • Questionnaire
explaining and civil society - CCs • Qualitative
local good 4.1 Institutional • Capacity of CCs statement
governance aspects - Leadership • WAIs for social
application • Technical and financial aspect to CCs in performing local scaling on degree of
in commune good governance influential (very
developmen • Participation of local people and civil society • Questionnaire low, low, moderate,
t planning - Local people - CCs high and very high)
- NGOs • T-test
- CBOs

53
 
  

Data Collection Methods/

Objective Parameter Complex/Simple Variable Data Analysis
Target informants
• Influence of political parties • Key informant interview
- NCDD and PRDC
- District councils
- District facilitator
- NGOs
• Attitude, feedback and satisfaction of local people • Questionnaire
4.2 Social - Benefit of local people from CDPs - CCs
aspects • Public awareness raising by media program • Group discussion
• Social networking - CCs
• Budget allocation system and procedure • Questionnaire
4.3 Economic • Resource generation and mobilization through local - CCs
aspects contribution
• Financial management
 

54
 
 

Annex II: Checklist for Secondary Data Collection

1. Profiles of Battambang province and study district and communes

• Geographical conditions
• Demography
• Agriculture (land holding, major crops, crop yields, aquaculture, agriculture area
and farm income)
• Non-agriculture (trading and other)
• Economic conditions (household income, poverty line, occupation, employment)
• Education (numbers of primary, secondary and high schools, universities and other
vocational training centers, number of educated and illiteracy people)
• Health (health centers, hospital, private clinics and facilities)
• Development problems, potentials and future plans

2. Commune information
• Organic law related to commune administration and decentralized local government
(commune councils)
• Sub-degree on commune fund
• Prakas (declaration) on commune development plan and its guidelines
• Prakas on procurement procedure
• Manual and guidelines on commune development plans (CDPs)
• Good local governance manual for commune councils (CCs)

3. Commune administration
• Commune administrative structure, functions, planning and management system
• Role and functions of decentralized local government in planning performance of
CCs and sub-committees
• Commune budget and revenue generation
• Sources of fund to support commune administration and development projects

4. Commune development plans (CDPs) 2007, 2008, 2009

• List of proposed and actual development projects of infrastructure and non-
infrastructure projects
• Infrastructure projects (road, pond, well, culvert, school building)
• Non-infrastructure projects
- Social
- Environment
- Economic (income generation, saving, credit)

55 
 
 

Annex III: A Checklist for Key Informants Interview

1. A Checklist for NCDD and PRDC Interview

Name: ………………………………………………………………………………………
Position: ……………………………………………………………………………………
Place of interview: …………………………………………………………………………
Date of interview: ………………………………………………………………………….
Remark: …………………………………………………………………………………….

1. What are the policies describe the applications of local good governance of commune
councils?
2. What are the key principles of local good governance which designed for commune
councils?
3. Do you think that these principles have been mainstreamed or applied in CDP process?
If yes, how and list down the key items that they applied? If no, why?
4. Do you think political parties enforce local good governance at commune level? Why?
5. What are the policies, strategies and regulations that enforce commune councils to
apply local good governance in CDPs? How these enforce CCs? To what extent?
6. What is capacity building program provided to commune councils?
7. What are the mechanisms to support local good governance?
8. What are the roles and programs of NCDD and PDRC to enhance local good
governance applications? How it enhanced? To what extent?
9. How do you strengthen financial transparency of commune councils?
10. What are the strengths and limitations of local good governance applications in CDPs?
11. Do you have any comment on local good governance application for the effective CDPs
implementation and performance?

2. A Checklist for Commune Councils and Clerks Interview

Name: ………………………………………………………………………………………
Position: ……………………………………………………………………………………
Place of interview: …………………………………………………………………………
Date of interview: ………………………………………………………………………….
Remark: …………………………………………………………………………………….

1. What are the key principles of local good governance?

2. Have your commune applied these key principles in CDPs? How? To what extent?
3. Are rules of law applied in CDPs? How? What are the relevance laws, sub-decrees,
declarations and decisions which are applicable in CDPs?
4. What are the principles of local good governance which have been used the most in
CDPs? Why?
5. What do you evaluate the level of understanding of local good governance in CDPs of
CCs, PBCs, Procurement Committee, and M and E committee? Why?
6. What is your overall satisfaction of local good governance application in CDPs of CCs?
Why?
7. What are your suggestions on local good governance application in CDPs
implementation and performance?

56 
 
 

3. A Checklist for District Councils and District Facilitators Interview

Name: ………………………………………………………………………………………
Position: ……………………………………………………………………………………
Place of interview: …………………………………………………………………………
Date of interview: ………………………………………………………………………….
Remark: …………………………………………………………………………………….
1. What do you evaluate the local governance of commune councils?
2. By considering on the following key principles of local good governance: rules of law,
participation, accountability, transparency, responsiveness, and effectiveness and
efficiency, to what extent have these been applied? How?
3. Among the above principles what principles have been applied the most by commune
councils?
4. What is your overall satisfaction on the applications of local good governance in CDPs
of CCs? Why?
5. What are your coaching and mentoring activities to enhance local good governance
application in CDP?
6. What are the strengths and limitations of local good governance applications in CDPs?
7. Do you have any comment on local good governance application for the effective
CDPs implementation and performance?

4. A Checklist for Local NGOs and International NGOs

Name: ………………………………………………………………………………………
Position: ……………………………From (Name of NGOs).……………………………
Place of interview: …………………………………………………………………………
Date of interview: ………………………………………………………………………….
Remark: …………………………………………………………………………………….
1. Would please kindly provide brief background of your organization?
2. How long have your organization been working and supporting these communes?
3. What kinds of program are being provided by your organization to these communes?
4. What are your organization strategies or activities to enhance local good governance
practices at commune level?
5. Based on your working experience with these communes, do you think that these
(commune councils) have applied local good governance principles in CDPs?
6. What are the principles or key principles of local good governance they have applied?
How?
7. Did you involve in the application of local good governance in CDPs? How?
8. What are the different of local good governance application in CCs’ project and NGOs’
project?
9. As local good governance principles have been applied in CDPs, what are the impacts
of the applications on institutional, social and economic aspect in CDPs of CCs? To
what extent?
10. By considering on institutional, social and economic aspects what are the factors
affecting the application of local good governance in CDPs of CCs? Why?
11. What are the strengths and limitations of local good governance applications in CDPs?
12. Do you have comments on local good governance application for the effective CDPs
implementation and performance?

57 
 
 

Annex IV: Questionnaires

LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN DECENTRALIZED LOCAL GOVERNMENT

IN CAMBODIA: CASE STUIES OF COMMUNE COUNCILS

This questionnaire is designed by the researcher to survey on the opinions and perceptions
of local people and local government on the applications of local good governance
principles in commune development planning (CDPs) as the partial fulfillment requirement
for Master of Science. The inquiry information and the answers of respondents will not be
subjected to be used for political purpose or any purpose that harms the respondents, besides
academy. The research is conducted based on code of conduct of research of Asian Institute
of Technology. Thus, prospective respondents are kindly requested to provide trusty
information based on below questions.

A Questionnaire for Commune Council Members

(Set A)

Name of Respondent: …………………………………………………………………………

Commune Prey Khpos Khnach Romeas

Date of Interview: ………………………………………………………………………………

Name of Interviewer: …………………………………………………………………………...

Remark:…………………………………………………………………………………………

Questionnaire No:

By

Young Sokphea (Mr.)

MSc Student
Regional and Rural Development Planning
School of Environment, Resources and Development
Asian Institute of Technology
Bangkok, Thailand
September, 2009

58 
 
  

A. Profile of Respondents
A.1 Gender: Male Female
A.2 Age: …………….. years
A.3 Marital Status: Married Single Separated
A.4 Education background
Primary school Secondary school High school
University Vocational training other (specify) ……….
A.5 Position in CCs:
CC chief 1st deputy commune chief 2nd second commune
chief
Clerk PBC members
M and E committee Procurement committee Women and children
committee other (specify) ……………………………………….
A.6 Member of other organizations and development agencies:
Member of CCSP
Member of Commune Councils Association of Cambodia
Member of Decentralization Network (Pact)
Other (specify)……………………………
A.7 Duration of working within the commune:
………………years 1st mandate 2nd second mandate
A.8 what is your annual income?
No Source of Income Annual Income (Riel)
1 Paddy
2 Crop
3 Livestock
4 Small business
5 Labour wage
6 Government officer
Total
A.9 What is your main occupation besides working for CCs?
Farming Middle man Retailer/small business
other (specify)……………………………………

B. Examination the Application of Local Good Governance in Commune Development

Planning
B.1 Have you ever attended training course related to the following courses?
Tick Training Course Attended Year Duration Delivered by (Name)
Local (good) governance
  Participatory governance
  Participatory planning
  Project Monitoring and
Evaluation
  Civic Engagement
  Financial Management
  Civil Society and Networking


 
59 
 
 

B.2 Have the following aspects of local good governance been applied in commune development plan? If yes, to what degree in each item has
been applied? To what extent?
1= very low, 2= low, 3= moderate, 4 = high and 5 = very high
No Items Applied Degree of If yes (how?), no(why?)
Application
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Participation
1 CCs exchange ideas about project of CDPs with district officers
2 CCs exchange ideas about project of CDPs with local CBOs
3 CCs exchange ideas about project of CDP with NGOs
4 Information about project are shared among CC and PBC
5 Local people participation in problems and need identification
6 Local people participation in prioritize project of CDPs
7 Local people participation in project site selection
8 Local people participation in project implementation
9 Local people participation in project monitoring and evaluation
Accountability
1 PBCs members perform according to assigned tasks in CDP guideline
Procurement committee execute their responsibilities in project
2
procurement from as assigned in project implement manual
M and E committee members performance in project monitoring and
3
evaluation according to the assigned tasks in CDPs
4 CCs set up committee to evaluation CDPs implement performance
5 CCs conduct evaluation on CDPs implement performance
6 CCs evaluate the performance of PBC
7 CCs evaluate the performance of M and E committee
8 CCs evaluate the performance of procurement committee
PBC, Procurement committee and M and E committee are accountable
9
to the outcome of CDPs and project implementation
10 CCs conduct evaluation on CDPs performance
11 CDPs performance evaluation report disclosed to public

60 
 
 

No Items Applied Degree of If yes (how?), no(why?)

Application
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
12 Conflicts have been solved with local people
13 Conflicts have been solved with other committees
14 Conflicts have been solved by CCs
Transparency
1 Awarding the contract based on majority voting of committee members
2 Biding results announce to public and among bidding companies
3 External audit conducted by provincial finance officer
4 Expense on project of CDPs recorded according to CC financial system
Efficiency and Effectiveness
1 CDPs developed according to the schedule annually
2 CDPs finished on time
3 Adequate amount of budget allocation to implement CDPs
4 Commune fund disbursed on time for CDPs implement
Technical staff from provincial and district fully committed to support
5 CCs in technical project design, site study and cost estimation
(infrastructure project)
6 Amount of commune fund used efficiently in CDPs investments
7 CCs fully committed to CDPs performance

B.3 As local good governance has been applied in commune development plan, to what is your overall understanding of the following key
principles of local good governance?
1= very low, 2= low, 3= moderate, 4 = high and 5 = very high
No Items Degree of understanding Comment
1 2 3 4 5
1 Participation
2 Transparency
3 Accountability
4 Effectiveness and efficiency

61 
 
 

B.4 As local good governance principles have been applied in commune development plan, among the following key aspects of local
governance principles which aspect have been using the most in CDPs? Please rank?
1= very low, 2= low, 3= moderate, 4 = high and 5 = very high
No Items Rank Comment
1 Participation
2 Transparency
3 Accountability
4 Effectiveness and efficiency

C. Impacts of the Application of Local Good Governance Application in CDP of CCs

C1. To what extend do you think the following items impacted from the application of local good governance in CDP? If so, why do you think
that it impacts?
Degree of impact: 1= very low, 2 = low, 3= moderate, 4= high and 5= very high
No Items Impact Degree of Why?
Impact
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Institutional impacts
1 Increased capacity of CCs in planning, implementation, and monitoring and
evaluation
2 Enhanced participatory planning of local people in decision making,
implementation, and monitoring and evaluation
3 Strengthened technical support staff from district and provincial level
4 Strengthened relationship between CCs and local people
5 Improved collaboration with NGOs on technical and financial support
6 Strengthened relationship among CCs and various local committees in CDPs
7 Increase good collaboration among CCs from different political parties
Social impacts
1 Increase social networking on collaboration with NGOs, IOs and others
2 Conflict of interests within CDPs among beneficiaries reduced

62 
 
 

No Items Impact Degree of Why?

Impact
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
3 Conflict of interest within CDPs among CCs and other committees reduced
4 Enhanced social unity in a community
5 Increased accessibility to school
6 Increased accessibility to health centre
7 Increased communication (road network)
8 Enhance accessibility for drinking and for irrigation
Economic impacts
1 CDPs project benefited beyond project target area
2 CCs increased resource mobilization for project implementation from NGOs
3 CCs increase local resource mobilization (local contribution)
4 Increased financial transparency of CCs
5 Increase employment
6 Enhanced income generation

D. Perception of Commune Councils Members on the Application of Local Good Governance in Commune Development Plan

D1. To what extend do you satisfy the application of the following items of local good governance in CDPs?
Degree of satisfaction: 1= strongly dissatisfied, 2 = dissatisfied, 3= neutral, 4= satisfied and 5=strongly satisfied
No Items Satisfied Degree of If yes (why?)
satisfaction
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Participation
1 CCs exchange ideas about project of CDPs with district officers
2 CCs exchange ideas about project of CDPs with local CBOs
3 CCs exchange ideas about project of CDP with NGOs
4 Information about project are shared among CC and PBC
5 Local people participation in problems and need identification

63 
 
 

No Items Satisfied Degree of If yes (why?)

satisfaction
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
6 Local people participation in prioritize project of CDPs
7 Local people participation in project site selection
8 Local people participation in project implementation
9 Local people participation in project monitoring and evaluation
Accountability
PBCs members perform according to assigned tasks in CDP
1
guideline
Procurement committee execute their responsibilities in project
2
procurement from as assigned in project implement manual
M and E committee members performance in project monitoring
3
and evaluation according to the assigned tasks in CDPs
4 CCs set up committee to evaluation CDPs implement performance
5 CCs conduct evaluation on CDPs implement performance
6 CCs evaluate the performance of PBC
7 CCs evaluate the performance of M and E committee
8 CCs evaluate the performance of procurement committee
PBC, Procurement committee and M and E committee are
9
accountable to the outcome of CDPs and project implementation
10 CCs conduct evaluation on CDPs performance
11 CDPs performance evaluation report disclosed to public
12 Conflicts have been solved with local people
13 Conflicts have been solved with other committees
14 Conflicts have been solved by CCs
Transparency
Awarding the contract based on majority voting of committee
1
members
2 Biding results announce to public and among bidding companies
3 External audit conducted by provincial finance officer

64 
 
 

No Items Satisfied Degree of If yes (why?)

satisfaction
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Expense on project of CDPs recorded according to CC financial
4
system
Efficiency and Effectiveness
1 CDPs developed according to the schedule annually
2 CDPs finished on time
3 Adequate amount of budget allocation to implement CDPs
4 Commune fund disbursed on time for CDPs implement
Technical staff from provincial and district fully committed to
5 support CCs in technical project design, site study and cost
estimation (infrastructure project)
6 Amount of commune fund used efficiently in CDPs investments
7 CCs fully committed to CDPs performance

E. Factors Explaining Local Good Governance Applications in CDPs

E1. To what extend do you think the following items affected the application of local good governance in CDPs of commune councils?

Degree of impact: 1= very low, 2 = low, 3= moderate, 4= high and 5= very high
Degree of
Influence
No Items Influence How
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Institutional
Availability of law/legislation, rules and regulation to support
1 local good governance
1 Capacity building provided by NCDD on local governance
2 People’s participation in planning and implementation of CDPs
3 Coaching and mentoring of district facilitators
4 Fund from NGOs program on local good governance enhancement
5 Coaching and mentoring of district facilitators

65 
 
 

Degree of
Influence
No Items Influence How
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
6 Other agencies’ local development fund for CDP implementation
Economic
1 Formula for budget allocation defined clearly in commune fund
declaration
2 Clear budget allocation categories defined in commune fund
3 Existing transparent financial management system
4 Effective financial monitoring system
5 Effective financial auditing from provincial financial officer
Social
1 Communication channel for dissemination information (public
awareness)
2 Increasing knowledge on local governance of CCs
3 Increasing knowledge on local governance of local people
4 Social networking to strengthen coordination and support

Thank you very much for your kind cooperation. Wish you good luck!

66 
 
 

LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN DECENTRALIZED LOCAL GOVERNMENT

IN CAMBODIA: CASE STUIES OF COMMUNE COUNCILS

This questionnaire is designed by the researcher to survey on the opinions and perceptions
of local people and local government on the applications of local good governance
principles in commune development planning (CDPs) as the partial fulfillment requirement
for Master of Science. The inquiry information and the answers of respondents will not be
subjected to be used for political purpose or any purpose that harms the respondents, besides
academy. The research is conducted based on code of conduct of research of Asian Institute
of Technology. Thus, prospective respondents are kindly requested to provide trusty
information based on below questions.

A Questionnaire for Households

(Set B)

Name of Respondent: …………………………………………………………………………

Commune Prey Khpos Khnach Romeas

Village Prey Sangha Balung Leu Balung Mean Chey

Ta Man Dangko Pen Boueng Chan Neang

Date of Interview: ………………………………………………………………………………

Name of Interviewer: …………………………………………………………………………...

Remark:…………………………………………………………………………………………

Questionnaire No:

By

Young Sokphea (Mr.)

MSc Student
Regional and Rural Development Planning
School of Environment, Resources and Development
Asian Institute of Technology
Bangkok, Thailand
September, 2009

67 
 
 

A. Characteristics of Respondents
A.1 Gender: Male Female
A.2 Age: …………….. years
A.3 Marital Status: Married Single Separated
A.4 Education background
Primary school Secondary school High school
University Vocational training Literacy class
Other (specify) ……….
A.5 Member of any organizations, development agencies and CBOs:
………………………………………………………………………………………….
A.6 How long have you been living in this commune?
Since ………………. (………… year)
A.7 Duration of involvement in CDPs:
………………years
A.8 What is your main occupation besides working for CCs?
Farming Rice cultivation Retailer/small business
other (specify) ……………………………………
A.9 What is your annual income?
No Source of Income Annual Income (Riel)
1 Paddy
2 Crop
3 Livestock
4 Small business
5 Labour wage
6 Government officer
Total

68 
 
 

B. Examination the Application of Local Good Governance in Commune Development Plan

B.1 By considering the following items of local good governance components, do you think that these have been used or applied by commune
councils in commune development planning? If these have been used or applied, to what extent these have been applied?
1= very low, 2= low, 3= moderate, 4= high and 5=very high
No Items AppliedDegree of How
Application
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Participation
1 CCs gives information to the public about CDPs
2 CCs use media to give information
3 CCs spread information about the project by posting notice
4 CCs use village headmen to spread information about project
5 CCs gives information to those affected by project of CDPs
6 CCs listen to the opinion of local people
7 CCs listen to the opinion of district facilitator
9 CCs listen to the opinion of NGOs and CBOs
10 The selected PBC members performed their roles on behalf of local
people
11 The selected Procurement committee member performed their roles on
behalf of local people
12 The selected M and E committee members performed their roles on
behalf of local people
13 Local people made decision on the priority problems and needs
14 Vulnerable groups and individual are given a chance to participate in
CDPs
15 Local people made decision on project selection and site identification
16 Local people participated in project feasibility study
17 Local people participated in implement project activities
18 Local people contributed budget for project implementation
19 Local people participated in field monitoring and evaluation
69 
 
 

No Items AppliedDegree of How

Application
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
20 Local people provide comments during field project monitoring and
evaluation
21 Maintenance group formulated after project completion
22 Maintenance group is functioning
Transparency
1 Transparency budget allocation
2 Financial report about project of CDPs is accurate
3 Financial report of the project of CDPs is easy to access
4 Signboard contain project budget and contribution present at each
project site
5 Accessibility to bidding documents by public
6 Bidding are conducted in public
Responsiveness
1 CDPs addressed local problems and needs
2 Project of CDPs implemented within time frame
3 Project of CDPs implemented at the time local problems and needs
incurred
4 Project of CDPs benefited to the community (including vulnerable
groups and individual)
5 Project of CDPs is allocated to every village of the commune
Efficiency and effectiveness
1 Quality of the project
2 Cost effectiveness of the project

70 
 
 

C. Impacts of the Application of Local Good Governance in CDPs of CCs

C1. By considering the following items, are these impacted from the application of local good governance in CDPs?
Degree of impacts: 1= very low, 2= low, 3= moderate, 4= high and 5=very high
Impacted Degree of Impact Why
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Social
1 No discrimination in beneficiaries selection
Vulnerable groups and individual gave a chance
2
to take part in the projects of CDPs
Vulnerable groups and individuals benefited from
3
CDPs’ projects
4 Local people are satisfied CDPs of CCs
Local people have positive comments on the
5
project of CDPs
Increased good relations between CCs and local
6
people
7 Local people actively participated in CDPs
Economic
1 Local people willing to contribute their resources
for local contribution
2 Corruption in CDPs project reduced
3 Cost effectiveness of the project of CDPs
4 High quality of the project of CDPs
5 Project of CDPs increased income of local people
6 Project of CDPs employed local people
(employed by contractors)

71 
 
 

D. Perception of Local People on the Applications of Local Good Governance Principles in CDPs

D1. By considering the following items of local good governance in commune development plan, please identify these items whether these are
useful for CDPs, to what extent? And whether you satisfy the application of these items in CDPs, to what extent?

Degree of satisfaction: 1= strongly dissatisfied, 2= dissatisfied, 3= neutral, 4 = satisfied and 5 = strongly dissatisfied
No Items Satisfied Degree of Why
Satisfaction
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
Participation
1 CCs gives information to the public about CDPs
2 CCs use media to give information
3 CCs spread information about the project by posting notice
4 CCs use village headmen to spread information about project
5 CCs gives information to those affected by project of CDPs
6 CCs listen to the opinion of local people
7 CCs listen to the opinion of district facilitator
9 CCs listen to the opinion of NGOs and CBOs
10 The selected PBC members performed their roles on behalf of local
people
11 The selected Procurement committee member performed their roles on
behalf of local people
12 The selected M and E committee members performed their roles on
behalf of local people
13 Local people made decision on the priority problems and needs
14 Vulnerable groups and individual are given a chance to participate in
CDPs
15 Local people made decision on project selection and site identification
16 Local people participated in project feasibility study
17 Local people participated in implement project activities
18 Local people contributed budget for project implementation

72 
 
 

No Items Satisfied
Degree of Why
Satisfaction
Yes No 1 2 3 4 5
19 Local people participated in field monitoring and evaluation
20 Local people provide comments during field project monitoring and
evaluation
21 Maintenance group formulated after project completion
22 Maintenance group is functioning
Transparency
1 Transparency budget allocation
2 Financial report about project of CDPs is accurate
3 Financial report of the project of CDPs is easy to access
4 Signboard contain project budget and contribution present at each
project site
5 Accessibility to bidding documents by public
6 Bidding are conducted in public
Responsiveness
1 CDPs addressed local problems and needs
2 Project of CDPs implemented within time frame
3 Project of CDPs implemented at the time local problems and needs
incurred
4 Project of CDPs benefited to the community (including vulnerable
groups and individual)
5 Project of CDPs is allocated to every village of the commune
Efficiency and effectiveness
1 Quality of the project
2 Cost effectiveness of the project

Thank you very much for your kind cooperation. Wish you good luck!

73 
 
 

Annex V: A Checklist for Group Discussion of CCs

Date : ...........................................................................................................................
Place: ...........................................................................................................................
Time: ...........................................................................................................................
Moderator: ...........................................................................................................................
Minute Taker: ...........................................................................................................................

1. Among various components of local good governance, what components have been
achieved? Why? To what extent these have been achieved?
2. In relation to the above, in which components have not yet been achieved in the
implementation of CDPs? Why?
3. As local good governance components have been considered and applied in CDPs, what
are the impacts (negative and positive) of the applications of local good governance
components on CDPs of CCs, please discuss on institutional, social and economic
aspects? Why?
4. Would you please identify key points that you considered as the factors affecting the
applications of local good governance in CDPs? Please discuss on institutional, social and
economic aspect? Why? To what extent these influenced the application of local good
governance in CDPs?
5. Based on your experience with CCs, what are the strengths and limitations/constraints on
the application of local good governance in CDPs?
6. Through the discussion on the above topics and the results, what are your suggestions
how to improve local good governance to make CDPs more effective and efficiency?

Annex VI: A Checklist for Group Discussion of Villagers

Date : ...........................................................................................................................
Place: ...........................................................................................................................
Time: ...........................................................................................................................
Moderator: ...........................................................................................................................
Minute Taker: ...........................................................................................................................

1. Are you aware of local good governance? What does it mean?

Please consider on:
- Participation
- Transparency
- Responsiveness
- Effectiveness and Efficiency
2. Did the commune councils apply these in CDP? How?
3. What are the benefits that you gained from the applications of local good governance in
CDPs of CCs? Why?
4. In general, are you satisfied the application of local good governance in CDPs of your
commune councils? Why?
5. What are you suggestions and recommendations on the applications of local good
governance in CDPs performance and implementation?

74 
 
 

Annex VII: Commune Development Plan (CDP) and Commune Investment Plan (CIP)

Table 1: Five Steps of Commune Development Planning Process

Steps Objectives Main Activities Expected Outputs
1. Draft of - The main objective of this - Meeting at commune level to analyze the village - Drafted of commune development
development step is to draft commune data, commune data, commune profiles and other framework and budget for
framework development framework and information data and use other analytical tools to consultative meeting on commune
and budget budget for consultative find out problems location of problem, causes of development to feedbacks and
meeting on commune problem, needs, constraints and solutions. recommendations. It consists of
development to get - Meeting at village level where members of PBC development needs, development
recommendation and other list down the problems, location, causes of goals, development strategies,
feedbacks. problems, needs, constraints and solutions to priorities activities and the
- Draft framework includes discuss with villagers. There should be at least estimation of financial resources
the needs, goals, strategies, 60% of total villagers participate the meeting of and expenditure needed.
priority activities and which 30% are females
estimated possible resources - Meeting at commune level (after meeting at
(the resources required for village) to identify development needs,
capital and current development goals, strategies and priority
expenditures) for next 5 activities
years. - PBC discuss how big each project and make
project cost estimation
2. Public - To present the framework of - Public meeting: inform villagers by using - Drafted of commune development
meeting on development and budget to announcement form 5 day before public meeting framework and budget to citizens
commune citizens - Facilitator uses the output from step one to and relevant stakeholders.
development - To get public comments to illustrate project or activities, development goals, - Got public comments to draft the
draft commune development estimate cost and priority activities to be done commune development plan and
plan to draft commune within 5 years and ask citizen to provide record those comments for drafting
development plan. comment, discuss or revise the commune development plan
- After meeting PBC revise the previous output
based on comment in the public meeting
3. Draft - PBC prepare commune development plan - Drafted of commune development
commune according to outline provided in the guideline and plan and the sending of this draft

75 
 
 

Steps Objectives Main Activities Expected Outputs

development result in step 1 and 2 (District Focal Point (DFP) document to provincial governor to
plan will assist the PBC to improve the content and review and comment
quality of commune development plan)
- PBC submit the plan to commune chief to be
reviewed and agreed and commune chief submit
to provincial governor review and provide
comment
4. Approve - To review, revise, approve - With support from PLAU, provincial governor - Commune development document
commune and disseminate the review and provide comment on commune approved for the commune mandate
development commune development plan development plan and for the basic to prepare
plan - DFT, PBC and commune clerk review comments commune investment plan
from provincial governor and revise commune
development plan.
- Commune chief conduct commune councils
meeting to review and approve on commune
development plan and disseminate the commune
development plan document and for the basic for
commune investment plan preparation
5. Evaluation - To review and evaluate the - Set up the committee to evaluate preparation and - The result of commune
on effectiveness of implementation of commune development plan. development plan implementation
implementat implementation the Committee consists of commune chief as a - Strengths and weaknesses of
ion of commune development plan chairperson, commune councilors, commune commune development plan found
commune to find out experiences for M&E focal persons, beneficiary representatives, - Feedback for improving the
development improving the next plan and other stakeholders as member. The evaluation preparation and management of
plan implementation and should be conducted within 6 month before new commune development plan
preparation. mandate implementation
- Commune M&E focal person assist commune - Lesson learned and experiences for
chief in regular collection of data, information next commune development
and documents related to the preparation and reparation
implementation of commune development
- Commune councils review and approve on the

76 
 
 

Steps Objectives Main Activities Expected Outputs

evaluation report and disseminate the report
publicly and to all related stakeholders
Source: Prakas (Declaration) on Commune Development Planning and Commune Investment Plan in 2007

Table 2: Scope of Commune Investment Plan

Steps Objectives
1. Review the • The main objective of this - Meeting at commune level where PBC review
problem or step is to review the
needs with problem, location of the
the citizens problem, cause of problem,
needs, constraints, and
solutions in order to prepare
C/S annual investment
projects.
2. Prepare • The main objective of this - PBC reflect the results in step 1 with the projects in
commune step is to prepare C/S
investment priority investment project
project and budget, that will be
presented for mobilize
resources support during
DIW.
Main Activities Expected Outputs
The list of problem, causes and
problem including lack of services, problem solutions of citizens are written
location, cause of problem, needs, constraints and down
solutions by reflecting with the village data,
commune data, commune data, commune profiles
and other information data
- The representatives of the villager and as the
members of PBC list out problems, location,
problems causes, needs, constraints and solutions
and discuss with villagers, villagers should divide
into two groups, women and men to discuss the
above.
- Meeting at commune level after finishing the
meeting at village level, the PBC meet at C/S to
consolidate the problems, location of problem,
causes of problems, needs, constraints and solutions
collected from the villages
Listed the proposed commune
the following years of CDP and identify annual investment project, priority project
investment project , and PBC continue to discuss to be invested and outputs of
and determine the type of project, location of previous years implementation
project, estimate cost, output sizes and numbers of
beneficiary
- Priority the investment project to present at District
Integration Workshop

77 
 

Steps Objectives
3. District • Give chance to link CIP
integrated with plans of the Provincial
workshop Line Departments, NGOs,
civil society and other
development partners.
• Mobilize the resources from
different sources to support
C/S investment projects.
• Guide the local activities to
be in line with the national
and provincial development
policies.
4. Approve • The main objective of this
commune step is to compile, review,
investment approve and disseminate the
program C/S Investment Program
document.
Main Activities Expected Outputs
- PBC review the last year project again the current
year investment project
- Commune chief send priority project to department
of planning and PLAU
- Commune chief present the output of last year and Temporary agreement between
investment for the coming year to participants commune and development
- Provincial line departments, NGOs, donors, civil Partners made.
society give their comment and support to the C/S
proposed projects.
- Signing on temporary agreement
- Provincial planning department representative
should summary the result of District Integration
Workshop
- PBC chooses the project to be invested without Document for commune investment
committed fund to use commune fund, the method program approved
of selection depends on agreement among PBC
member by maintaining the participation,
transparency and equity of using commune fund
should be include into table of funded commune
investment projects.
- PBC arrange table of investment by sources, table
of investment project with committed fund and
schedule for disseminating and consulting with
citizen in each village in commune, then commune
chief prepare announcement letter on the
dissemination and consultation with citizens.
- PBC presents the table of investment by sources
and with committed fund to get idea and comment
78 

Steps Objectives
5. Monitoring • To monitor the progress and
and effectiveness of investment
Evaluation project implementation in
on order to ensure the
implementat implementation of the
ion projects are on the right
commune ways and on time.
investment • To review and evaluate the
program effectiveness of the
implementation of CIP and
get experiences for
improvement the next
implementation
management and planning
process.
Main Activities Expected Outputs
from participant. This process encourages people
to participate in commune investment project and
in implement the project.
- Draft commune investment project based on
outputs of step 1, 2 and 3 of commune investment
process.
- Commune councils organize meeting to review
and approve on the draft of commune investment
project document, the approval is valid base on the
50% support from commune councils
- Disseminate the commune investment project
document
Monitoring Monitoring report on:
- Commune M&E focal persons should prepare - The progress of project
action plan to monitor all project implementation implementation.
and collect all useful data, reports and documents - The weakness of project
related to investment project implement implementation.
- Commune M&E focal persons should prepare - Comments for improvement
monitoring reports including others comments and Evaluation report on:
submit to commune councils for review and - The results of CIP
discuss during commune monthly meeting implementation.
Evaluation - The strengths and weakness of
- CCs should set up a committee to evaluate the commune investment program
implementation of CIP. This committee shall be - The lesson learnt on preparation
led by C/S chief and has its membership of C/S and management of commune
councilors, C/S M&E focal persons, other C/S investment program
focal persons, beneficiary representatives, and implementation
other concerned stakeholders. - Recommendation for further
- The committee can select some projects as sample improvement on the next
to be evaluated. commune investment program
- The detail evaluation guideline should be followed implementation and process.
79 
 

Steps Objectives Main Activities Expected Outputs

the “Commune manual on M&E of local
development”
- The project evaluation should be conducted during
and at the end of project implementation.
- Commune councilors shall review and approve the
evaluation report, then disseminate this report to
public and to all concerned stakeholders.
Source: Prakas (Declaration) on Commune Development Planning and Commune Investment Plan in 2007

80 
 
 

Annex VIII: Cycle of Commune Development Plan and Commune Investment Plan

81 
 
 

Annex IX
Research Plan 2009-2010

Period 2009 2010

Activities July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar April May
Thesis proposal development
Proposal defense and improvement
Reconnaissance Survey
Field Work (Data Collection)
Data Entry, Processing and Analysis
First Draft Preparation
Thesis Progress Review
Thesis Draft Revision
Thesis Final Defense
Final Thesis Submission

82 
 
 

Annex XI
Research Budget Estimation
Type of Expenditure Description Unit Cost/unit (Baht) Total
1. Transportation
1.1 Plane fare 2 ways BKK-PP-BKK 1 6500 6500
1.2 Bus fare In the field 1 1550 1550
1.3 Local transportation In the field 1 2500 2500
Sub Total 10550
2. Field Work
2.1 Field work assistance In the field 20 400 8000
2.1 Lodging In the field 20 400 8000
Sub Total 16000
3. Miscellaneous
3.1 Telephone/telegram/telex/fax International/ in the field 1 1900 1900
3.2 Film, slides, prints In the field 1 2500 2500
3.3 Photocopying In the field 1 1500 1500
3.4 Others In the field 1500
Sub Total 7400
4. Report Production
4.1 Artwork/graphics/maps In the field 2500
4.2 CD/Diskettes/ribbon In the field 400
4.3 Reproduction of required numbers of copies In the field 1800
4.4 Reproduction of required number of copies In the field 1500
Sub Total 6200
Grand Total 40150

83