Promoting public participation in commune investment decisions: The case of Nam Dinh province

DR. NGUYEN THI THU CUC
MA. DOAN BICH HONG

1. Introduction

Public engagement also enables local governments to mobilize intellectual, experiential, labor, financial, and material resources from the local population in the context of limited public resources, increasing consensus in the decision implementation process.

This paper aimes to present the case of participatory investment decision-making of the commune governments in Nam Dinh province and analyze the factors influencing public participation. It is based on the 2018 survey on participatory decision-making of the commune governments in Nam Dinh province. Fifty three out of 188 communes in the province were selected representing geographical areas (land-locked and coastal communes, rural and peripheral communes) and economic development levels (communes in the new rural development districts and in the non-rural development districts). The survey’s participants were commune leaders and villagers: Eighty-two leaders of these 53 communes filled in the questionnaire and were invited for unstructured interviews; 347 villagers from randomly selected six communes among the 53 communes were surveyed. The research is limited to the public participation in the process of making decisions on investment under jurisdiction of the commune governments, investment within the national target programs, and investment partially or fully financed by the commune community.

2. Theoretical framework on participatory decision-making

There are five stages in the decision-making process: (1) defining the decision issue/ the problem to be solved; (2) defining objectives to be met when making a decision; (3) developing alternatives; (4) selecting the solution; (5) issuing the decision.

Participatory decision-making is a social process in which people participate at a certain stage of the decision-making process to express their concerns and needs and participate at different levels ranging from receiving information, consultation, collaboration, and self-determination, which is the highest level of participation.

At the information reception level, the people are informed about the issues/ problems to be addressed, the development of the objectives to be met, the options to be selected, and the decisions issued by the local government.

At the consultation level, the people consult with the commune government r what issues need to be resolved, the goals to be reached, and appropriate solutions for implementation

At the collaboration level, as active actors in local decision-making, the people collaborate with the local government to identify decision issues, develop and select alternatives.

At the self-determination level, the highest level of participation, the people themselves determine the choice of options to be institutionalized by the local government.

Not every decision by the commune government is participatory. The people participate in making decisions which are related to the public interest and community interests. However, participatory decision-making of the commune government is necessary and plays an important role. In a constantly changing world, local government is not the only actor in solving increasingly complex and unpredictable problems. Public consultation and the active cooperation between the government and the people demonstrates a high level of democracy⁽¹⁾. Institutions for public participation ensure that those affected by local government decisions will be able to express their needs in the process of decision formulation and implementation by the local government.

Local people have the right to participate and they must genuinely participate. Their participation must not be seen as just a means to achieve the goal of decision-making. Their needs, concerns and priorities reflected during the decision-making process help the local government issue evidence-based decisions which are legitimate and feasible with people-centric efforts to meet the needs of the local people⁽²⁾.

Effective participation is influenced by institutional factors, socio-economic factors, and the participation capabilities of the people themselves. Regulations on mandatory public participation ensures that local governments promote public participation⁽³⁾. Access to information is a prerequisite for participatory decision-making. Socio-economic factors have a certain impact on public participation⁽⁴⁾ and the education factor has the most influence; those with limited educational levels often lack the knowledge and skills to participate. Lack of diverse forms of mobilization of people, especially the poor, is also a factor restricting public participation.

3. Regulations related to commune investment

According to the 2019 Law on Public Investment, medium-term public investment plans at the commune level are decided by the commune-level People’s Council based on the resolution of the district-level People’s Council. Public investment programs approved by the People’s Council at the same level, and commune investment in group B and group C projects are decided by the chairman of commune-level People’s Committee, except for those using ODA capital and concessional loans from foreign sponsors in the fields of defense, security, religion, other programs, and projects according to the Government regulations.

Public investment plans, solutions to implement public investment plans with capital sources under commune-level management, monitor and evaluation of the plan implementation are decided by commune-level People’s Committees

Decree No. 27/2022/ND-CP dated April 19, 2022, by the Government stipulates the management mechanism and implementation of national target programs requires the promotion of public participation in planning, implementation, and monitoring of national target programs. Accordingly, the residential community can propose and contribute to plans for the implementation of investment projects under national target programs at the commune level. The Decree regulates the procedure for planning the implementation of participatory national target programs.

The Law on the implementation of grassroots democracy stipulates that commune authorities must inform people about the investment construction situation managed by the commune level, and that the people participate by contributing to the decision making on public investment projects that directly impact the socio-economic life of the local community where they are implemented. A Community Investment Supervision Board is established for programs and projects invested with capital sources and contributions of residential communities or by direct funding from organizations and individuals. For the projects invested with capital sources and contributions of the community, the projects funded by the commune-level budget, or the projects funded by organizations and individuals, investors are required to provide the local people with information about processes, technical regulations, types and quantity of materials, acceptance of the project outputs, and project final settlements.

4. Public participation in the commune investment decision-making in Nam Dinh province

Nam Dinh is a Northern Delta province with a population of 1,780,393 people, of which 81.8% live in rural areas, 19.4% have primary education, 49.6% have secondary education, and 12.8% have high school education; 18.4% have post-secondary education or higher⁽⁵⁾. Nam Dinh province has 10 district-level administrative units and 226 commune-level administrative units, including 188 communes⁽⁶⁾. The multidimensional poverty rate in the province is 2022 was 4.77%⁽⁷⁾.

The reality of public participation:

The people were informed of the investment policy and identified the investment decision issues such as investment priorities. Villagers developed investment alternatives to implement the priorities they identified. Together with commune officials and in collaboration with the construction companies, they examined alternatives and determined the solutions. People were involved in the early stage of the decision-making process of the commune government which was the process of identification of decision issues or problems to be solved concerning commune investment. They participated in all stages of decision-making at all levels of participation and reached the highest rung which was self-determination.

The people were consulted on commune investment activities and 64.5% of those surveyed stated that the commune government provided feedback that they incorporated the peoples’ contributions in their final decisions and 50.1% stated that the government gave the reasons for not incorporating some of the contributions provided by the local people.

There were generally disparities between the government’s efforts in information provision, consultation, collaboration, facilitation of self-determination decision of the local people and the actual public participation in all stages of the commune investment decision-making. In the stage of identification of the decision issues/problem, while 76.8% of the surveyed commune leaders informed villagers of the commune investment issues, only 18.7% of the surveyed people were aware of the information.

According to the existing legislation on commune-level investment within the national target programs, public participation is mandatory. According to the Law on Access to Information in 2016, commune governments are responsible for providing people with information created and received by them during the performance of their functions including decision-making. Limited access to information causes a barrier for people to determine priority issues to be solved in the commune-level investment and hindered participation at higher levels.

Another big disparity was found in the stage of development of alternatives when 78% of the surveyed commune leaders saying they conducted consultation and 20.7% of the surveyed people saying they were consulted on the alternatives. This discrepancy also exists in the stage of identifying the issues that need decisions and problems that need solving in which 4.9% of the surveyed commune leaders let the people self-determine the investment issues of the commune but 2% of the surveyed people said they determined the investment issues.

The higher level of participation, the fewer commune leaders involved the people in the process of making decisions on commune investment and the fewer people were involved. While more commune leaders involved people in the levels of participation of information, consultation, and collaboration in the decision-making process, fewer commune leaders let people determine the decision issues or problems, the development of alternatives and the selection of the solution. Nearly half of the surveyed commune leaders (45.1%) stated in the unstructured interviews that “people were not capable of determining” and “it took too much time to get people’s self-determination” and more than a half of them (58.5%) stated “it was the government’s business to identify the decision issues and problems to be solved”. This perception partly explains why the government’s response rate to the community’s right to self-determination in various stages remains low.

Interestingly, the percentage of the surveyed commune leaders involving the people in the stage of development of alternatives was higher compared to the other stages of identification of decision issues/ problems and objectives and selection of the solution. Similarly, more people participated in the stage of development of alternatives than in the other stages. The Ordinance on grassroots democracy, to which the surveyed commune leaders referred to when involving public participation in their decision making, provided that the commune government must inform the local community of any guidelines or investment plans of the commune. Legal normative documents provided that commune governments inform the people of the objectives, proposed activities, assistance, and funds from the state budget for the investment projects under the national target programs in communes; meaning that many investment decision issues or problems that need to be solved through investment solutions were identified beforehand.

Achievements and limitations in promoting public participation in commune investment decision-making

The investment decision-making process of the commune governments in Nam Dinh province involves the participation of the people in all decision-making stages. Relevant stakeholders best accomplished the identification of concerns and objectives in the decision-making process⁽⁸⁾. In this case, the local people identified the investment priorities to be implemented and determined alternative options. According to the IAP2 Participation Spectrum, the local people in the communes of Nam Dinh province influenced the decision-making process and even controlled it when they participated in the early stage of the process and determined solutions in certain cases.

Using the comparative approach in research, the case provided a comparison between the efforts of the commune government in involving local people and the reality of public participation, which was not given much focus in the existing literature. The findings revealed that the efforts of commune leaders in involving the people in the decision-making process failed to result in high public participation. Further research is needed to determine the reasons for this failure.

People rarely reached the highest participation level of self-determination decision in all stages of the investment decision-making process of the commune government. In a context where people are increasingly demanding a higher degree of power or control to guarantee that they can govern the process⁽⁹⁾ and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development encourages governments worldwide to ensure participatory decision-making at all levels, it is recommended to better involve people in the highest level of participation. This could be achieved through education to develop the skills needed for participation, especially the skills of consultation, collaboration, and self-determination.

Institutional factors such as regulations to institutionalize public participation and compliance with regulations, public officials’ perception of public participation, and people’s membership of local institutions presented in the case are proved to relate to public participation in the investment decision-making process of the commune government. The difference in perception of public participation among commune leaders resulted in different achievements in promoting public participation in the investment decision-making. In contrast to the commune leaders’ perception of public participation as a means to implement their organizational responsibilities, people viewed participation as a means to ensure that those affected by the government decisions had influence over the decision-making(10) and even determined the solution. Compulsory participation could result in formality in participation and be liable to capture by interest groups. Therefore, it is recommended to raise awareness among local officials on the necessity and benefits of public participation. This is not just a legal requirement that local governments need to comply with in their decision making. Public participation is not the top priority of many people and they need some encouragement to participate. Those with lower education are more likely to lack the necessary skills to participate. In addition to promoting the people’s engagement in the ongoing rural development programs, encouragement of their membership in local institutions is suggested as a way to make villagers more active in public participation.

5. Lessons learned

The followings are lessons learned to promote public participation in commune investment decision making

First, regarding raising awareness among commune leaders. Commune leaders are required to thoroughly understand the necessity and role of public participation in the local decision-making process. They need to change their thinking about the people’s role in government building and local governance and need to communicate with the local people about the importance of their participation as well as disseminate regulations related to public participation in commune investment decision-making in village meetings and voter meetings with diverse forms of dissemination that are suitable to the local context.

Second, regarding capacity building. Commune officials’ need a good understanding of the regulations and procedures related to public participation. It is especially crucial that they understand regulations related to people’s self-determination, in commune investment decisions. Therefore, it is imperative that commune officials improve their explanation, communication, consultation, and cooperation skills. It is vital to respect the different opinions of people and constantly encourage the participation of all classes of local people so that no one is left behind. Community institutions such as village heads, village development boards, community investment supervision boards, inter-family groups, reputable people, and officials of social organizations need training to improve their participation capacity, such as skills in giving feedback; alternative development and selection skills, especially for commune-level construction investment projects; decision-making skills, cooperation skills, and teamwork skills so that they can be able to effectively engage in the commune investment decision-making.

Third, regarding response mechanisms. Commune authorities are required to develop and implement a response mechanism to promote public participation. People’s opinions should be carefully listened to and documented so that they can be used as a reference in the decision-making process, especially for investment decisions that involve participation. Commune leaders are responsible for responding to people’s comments including how the comments were received, and in cases that they are not accepted, the reason for not accepting them must be given.

6. Conclusion

This paper elaborated the model of the participatory decision-making process through the case of the participatory investment decision-making process of the commune governments in Nam Dinh province.

The investment decision-making process of the commune governments is considered participatory when people were involved in all stages of the process. However, there were big disparities between efforts of the commune leaders in involving the people in the investment decision-making and the actual public participation. People rarely reached the highest participation level of self-determination.

There is evidence in the case study that those commune leaders perceiving participation not only a legal requirement to comply with but also a necessity would attract more people to be involved in the decision-making process, especially letting them determine decision issues, development of alternatives, and selection of the solution. The case revealed that villagers who were members of local institutions and who had higher income and educational attainment participated more and at higher levels.

It is recommended to raise the awareness of the local leaders of the necessity and benefits of the public’s participation in the decision-making and educate villagers on participation skills. Enhanced participation is a precondition for a democratic society which is an ultimate goal of public governance. In order to implement the target of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in which no one is left behind and decision-making is inclusive, participatory, and responsive, public participation should be further promoted and strengthened.

_________________

Received: March 4, 2023; Revised: June 2, 2023; Approved for publication: June 26, 2023.

Endnotes:

(1) Ferlier, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzerald, L. & Pettigrew, A. (1996). The question of accountability: New forms or a democratic deficit? The new public management in action. Oxford Press, 195-223.

(2) Rydin, Y. & Pennington, M. (2000). Public participation and local environmental planning: the collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local environment, 5(2), 153-169.

(3), (11) Schivao-Campo, S. & Sundaram, P. (2000). To serve and to preserve: improving public administration in a competitive world. Asian Development Bank.

(4), (12) Harrigan, J. J. & Nice, D. C. (2013). Politics and policy in states and communities, (7th ed.), Pearson.

(5) 2019 General Population and Housing Census.

(6) Resolution No. 858/NQ-UBTVQH1 dated 10 January 2020 of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly on the arrangement of commune-level administrative units in Nam Dinh province.

(7) Resolution No. 62/QD-UBND dated 06 Jan. 2023 of the Chairperson of the People’s Committee of Nam Dinh province approving the results of reviewing poor and near-poor households in 2022.

(8) Renn, O., Webler, T., Rakel, H., Dienel, P. & Johnson, B. (1993). Public participation in decision making: a three-step procedure. Policy Sciences, 26(3), 189-214.

(9) Arnstein, S. R. (1969/2011). A ladder of citizen participation. The City Reader (5th ed.), 238-250.

(10) Sewell, W. R. D & Phillips, S. D. (1979). Models for the evaluation of public participation programs. Natural Resources Journal, 19, 337-358.