1. TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE
LOCAL GOVERNANCE IN
AFGHANISTAN
Presented by: Yoshiko Ogawa
4th International Conference on
Sustainable Future for Human
Security, SustaiN 201３
20 Oct 2013

2. Structure of this presentation
• Peacebuilding/governance and development
• Community-based Development: Results?
• Community-based Development: In Afghanistan?
• Contexts and conditions of communities
• Facilitation
• Program in scale, with eyes for micro-dynamics

3. Peacebuilding/governance and development
• Why peacebuilding and development?
• Personal reflection:
development project in Cambodia, 2006
• Why peacebuilding and governance?
• Peacebuilding and Statebuilding
Top-down, supply-driven process vs bottom-up, inclusive approach
• Local governance:
“the systems, institution and processes through which local
authorities interact with, and provide services to citizens and other
forms of association”
“the mechanism by which citizens themselves meaningfully articulate
their interests and needs, mediate their differences, and exercise
their rights and duties”
(UNDP. Governance for Peace. NY: UNDP; 2012. p4)
• Personal reflection:
Community-based development, Community driven development

4. Community-based Development: Results?
• Community-based Development:
with “the explicit objective of reversing power relations in a manner
that creates agency and voice for poor people and gives them more
control over development assistance” (Mansuri and Rao 2013. p. 15)
• Participatory decision-making
• Implementation of sub-projects
Democratic decision-making body
 Access to social services
 Improved relationships with the local/state government
• In spite of wide acceptance of the relationship between development and
peacebuilding, outcomes and impacts are varied.
• Reviews of programmes and projects indicate mixed results
• Mansuri and Rao 2013, Mallett and Slater 2013
“the evidence in this area is much more mixed and far less convincing
(Mallette and Slater 2013. p. 10)

5. In Afghanistan?
• Context
• History of power struggle start with modernization efforts
• Ethnic, tribal and political divisions
• Mistrust of the government
Needs for inclusive development with results
Legitimacy of the transitional government was at stake
• National Solidarity Program
• Started in 2003 by the Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development
• 31,642 communities out of estimated total number of more than 42,000
villages are covered by 2011
• Aimed to;
• enhance community-level governance by strengthening communities’ capacity for
project management
• improve community infrastructure for better access to social services
• make the government visible and accountable to the rural population

6. In Afghanistan?
• National Solidarity Program
• Process
• Selected communities form Community Development Council
• Make a community projects plan
• Implementation and monitoring
• Challenges
• Community Development Council (CDC): new local decision making body
• Participation of women in the public c arena
• Outcomes
• Various forms of CDCs
• Criticism to CDC and funds channeled in the community
• Reported positive outcomes

7. In Afghanistan?
• UN-Habitat and People’s Process
• People’s Process since 1984 for slum upgrading programs, for post-disaster and
post-conflict recovery and reconstruction in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Indonesia, and
Afghanistan
• It is to support people improving their lives by planning their own settlements
• Formalized process: community mobilization, community action planning,
community contract and implementation, and monitoring
• Loose process: Community Fora Program from 1995, with knowledge,
networks, discreetness and trust

8. In Afghanistan?
• Case study methodology
• 2 cases
• purposive samples, from urban and rural areas of Afghanistan where
community mobilization process was facilitated following the steps of the
People’s Process
• look into the community level dynamism during the facilitation.
• Originally reported to the UN-Habitat Kabul country office by field mangers in
2011 (Adalat case) and by an international staff after his field mission in 2012
(Baborian case) in the efforts to collect success cases in community-centered
development
• Separate sets of questions were sent to national managers in charge of the
projects to obtain detail information on the contexts
• Further information for clarification and elaboration on the cases, and views on
community development and quality of social organizers was solicited through
e-mails from UN-Habitat senior staff in Kabul and provinces.

9. In Afghanistan?
• Cases 1: Baborian Community
Development Council
• Informal settlement in Jalalabad
city, Nangarhar province
• EU funded community upgrading
project
• To enable vulnerable
households, including returnees and
IDPs, to address their immediate and
pressing needs for shelter and basic
services while establishing and
strengthening local governance
institutions
A drawing by a female CDC member 5 months after the
facilitation start
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan

10. Small meeting before CDC establishment
Female CDC election
• Community mobilization started in
March 2010
• Social organizers went to see the
community and religious leaders to
explain the project and its
activities
• CDCs established. But the
community activities did not go
well.
Community Action Planning © UN-Habitat Afghanistan

11. • Urban community members are
not related each other
• Past bitter experience
• Lived in a rented house and were
not interested in investing for
community infrastructure
development
• Busy to earn incomes
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan
CDC election process
CDC election process

12. • After almost a year, the social organizers
became sure that trust of the community
had developed
• Problems were discussed and further
analysed, and then prioritized
• Outcomes
Project implementation
(i) improved community infrastructure
(ii) capacity building of CDC as well as five
women community members
(iii) registered CDC status with the municipality
as a legal entity
(iv) linkage of the CDC with other government
departments and NGOs
(v) enhanced ownership of the assisted
project and trust and confidence among
the CDC and community members
(vi) strengthened sense of responsibility as
active players in socio-economic activities
People’s Process help strengthen
social capital (bonding)
CDC capacity building training
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan

13. On going pavement construction
Completed pavement
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan
• Social organizers and engineers of
the project provided technical
support
• Social organizers acted as close
friends and mediators to resolve
conflicts in the community
• Female organizer handled wife
beating
• Social organizers presented
themselves as role models for the
community, showing how the
social organizers, who are just like
anyone else in the community, can
work with an international
organization

14. In Afghanistan?
• Cases 2: Adalat Cluster Community
Development Council
• Rural area in Balkh province
• UN-Habitat started working in the
area in 2003 under the National
Solidarity Program
• 5 CDCs were clustered to implement
common road project
• Facilitation of the CCDC began in
March 2010
• From the beginning, one of the five
CDCs, Gormer CDC did not show any
interest in the planning and did not
attend the meetings
• The project in Adalat CCDC came to
halt
Adalat Cluster CDC
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan

15. Road project excavation for foundation
of culvert
Road project constructed culvert
• Gormar CDC had a historical rivalry with
Qizilabad CDC
• This ethnic tension came to a peak during
the Taliban regime when around 80
Pashtun and Hazara people in the area
were killed
• Since then distrust and enmity between
these two communities had dominated the
people. No one from Gormer and Qizilabad
travelled to the other
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan

16. Graveled road
Social audit
• Social organizers talked with a
various parties of the communities
and elders to prove that they took
no one’s side and bring out the
issues common to all and gain
trust of the community members
• After a series of meetings and
consultations among the CCDC
member communities, Gormar CDC
finally agreed to participate
• 4 projects implemented (grid
extensions, construction of four
water reservoirs, and cluster
community road improvement)
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan
Completed culvert

17. • The area became more accessible and
safer for driving
• 3,000 person-day-worth jobs
• Qizilabad and Gormar communities had
a ceremony to officialize their renewed
relationships
• visit each other for social functions such
as weddings and funerals
People’s Process help strengthen
social capital (bridging)
Gormar and Qizilabad CDC members reconciled
People’s Process can provide an
opportunity and methodology to
initiate interaction, deepen mutual
understanding, and consolidate
social capital of community
members
© UN-Habitat Afghanistan

18. Contexts and conditions of communities
• Implementation of the Program on the ground requires varying
forms of adaptation and subtle facilitation
• Differences in social relations, power
structure, geography, economic and social standing…

19. Facilitation
• Needs in-depth knowledge about the social relations and practices
within the particular community
• Critical roles Facilitating Partners play in mobilization of
communities, capacity development of CDCs and facilitation of
these processes
• The relation of the communities with FPs affects communities’
perception towards a CDC as well. Facilitation is not only technical
but also relational; all FPs interviewed in an evaluation study said
that it was not possible to obtain communities’ genuine
participation without trust of the community in FPs
• Social organizers’ familiarity to the area as well as their qualification
and experience in facilitation are central to win the trust of
communities

20. Program in scale, with eyes for micro-dynamics
• People’s Process worked because of the
flexible adaptation, in-depth knowledge of
facilitators on the contexts, and persistent
trust building
• A large scale programs are needed at the
national level, to extend the impacts
• Programs should be designed to allow rooms
for adaptation on the ground and learning
from experiences
• A mechanism of monitoring to support the
field level implementation and ensure quality
facilitation of community activity processes is
important

21. Thank you for your attention and interest.