Topic: equity

RELEASE: 14 Latin American and Caribbean Countries Adopt an Ambitious Plan of Action to Improve Access Rights in the Region

Lauren Zelin — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 17:17:15 -0400

Fourteen Latin American and Caribbean countries adopted an ambitious Plan of Action to improve access rights in the region, including access to information, public participation, and access to justice. The plan, which was approved at a meeting in Guadalajara, Mexico, on April 16-17, 2013, seeks to implement the Latin American and Caribbean Declaration on Principle 10 that was signed at the Rio +20 Conference in June 2012, under which countries agreed to work towards a regional instrument to improve access rights.

The meeting began with Colombia and Honduras signing on to the LAC Declaration, a major accomplishment for all parties. The 14 countries that have now signed on include: Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Uruguay.

“The new Plan of Action shows political will to transform environmental justice and transparency in the region,” said Carole Excell, Senior Associate at the World Resources Institute and The Access Initiative. “It sets the pace and the agenda to tackle the challenges of negotiating a regional instrument to ensure access rights across Latin America and the Caribbean.”

Under the new 2013-2014 Plan of Action, the LAC countries have committed to:

Promote the Principle 10 Declaration and incorporate new signatories into the process;
Strengthen and highlight the progress made on rights of access to information, participation, and justice;
Promote active participation of civil society at the national level; and
Develop working groups to deliberate capacity-building and cooperation efforts, and determine the nature and scope of the regional instrument.

Ambassador Jose Balmaceda of Chile noted that the Plan of Action “is a strong political signal to the international community that we are responding in a responsible way to this commitment [to Principle 10] … It is the first time that government representatives from 14 countries and civil society sat down to debate – with transparency and trust – relevant issues for the future of the region. This is a testament to maturity in the region. We have been able to reach consensus on the Plan of Action that will allow us to move ahead on national processes and regional efforts. I am sure that this result will motivate other nations in the region to join the process.”

The Plan of Action includes a number of innovative provisions, including procedures for public participation in the regional process and its working groups. It will create opportunities for close South-to-South cooperation on rights to promote transparency, public participation, and access to justice, as well as a focus on increased support for effective implementation at the national level.

“We hope at the end of 2014 we can count on the development of an instrument on Principle 10 that establishes concrete actions to guarantee effective and informed participation to all citizens and communities of our region,” said Daniel Barragan, Ecuadorian Center for Environmental Law (Centro Ecuatoriane de Derecho Ambinental Ambiental), an environmental law NGO. “Soon we can have a voice and be a part of the decision making on the environment and natural resources.”

In addition to adopting the Plan of Action, members elected co-chairs to run the working groups. Costa Rica and Brazil were mandated to design the regional instrument on Principle 10 and Jamaica and Columbia were given the role to facilitate work on cooperation and capacity building.

RELEASE: Caribbean Freedom of Information Network launched at Landmark Conference

Lauren Zelin — Fri, 22 Mar 2013 13:55:32 -0400

11 Caribbean Countries Meet to Discuss Freedom of Information Laws in the Region

For the first time, Caribbean governments and civil society have come together to discuss access to information, public participation in governance, and access to justice at a landmark conference held in Kingston, Jamaica. Representatives from 11 Caribbean countries attended the “Regional Conference on Freedom of Information in the Caribbean: Improving Management for the Environment.”

At the close of the two-day conference on March 21, 2013, governments, civil society, and media announced the decision to launch a Caribbean network on freedom of information to support processes to improve standards for access to information in the region.

Dr. Carolyn Gomes, chairperson of the Access to Information Advisory Stakeholders’ Committee and Executive Director of Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) said, “freedom of information is the most powerful tool for ordinary citizens to arm themselves with the information they need to change their lives. Launching this freedom of information network will build opportunities for collaboration, learning and capacity building among information commissioners, civil society and media across the region.”

Countries reviewed the status and effectiveness of freedom of information laws, the number of requests for information being made in each country, and institutional structures for implementation and enforcement. Jamaica is one of seven Caribbean countries (Belize, Trinidad and Tobago, Antigua and Barbuda, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and the Cayman Islands) to have freedom of information laws in force. Five countries have draft laws pending, and Bahamas and Guyana have passed laws but they are not yet in force. Gaps in implementation were noted in Belize, Antigua, and St Vincent and the Grenadines, which have laws that have not yet fully been utilized by the public.

“Freedom of information laws ensure that citizens can access official documents from their governments and gives them a voice in decisions that directly impact them and the environment,” said Danielle Andrade, Legal Director of the Jamaica Environment Trust. “Using Jamaica’s Access to Information Act, we were able to obtain documents to build our legal case to compel the government to fix a non-functioning sewage treatment plant in Harbour View, Kingston.”

The event was a follow-up to the Rio+20 sustainable development conference in May of 2012, where ten countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) signed a declaration to work towards a legally binding, regional instrument to promote the implementation of the rights of access to information, public participation, and access to justice in environmental matters. Jamaica was the first Caribbean country to sign the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) Declaration on Principle 10, and Trinidad and Tobago joined in 2013.

“The LAC Principle 10 regional declaration is a game changing opportunity for the region,” said Carole Excell, Senior Associate at the World Resources Institute. “Caribbean governments need to embrace new regional approaches that seek to improve transparency, reduce conflicts over environmental decisions, and build capacity to implement new rights for citizens.”

Michelle Fife, Legal Advisor to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of St. Vincent and the Grenadines stated, “this is a positive initiative which brings the region together on an important issue. Transparency is important to our government. With continued work we will build and strengthen our institutional capacity to improve access to information.”

The conference was funded by The Commonwealth Foundation, the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, and the Information Commissioner’s Office of the Cayman Islands. Organizers included the Jamaica Environment Trust (JET), World Resources Institute (WRI), The Access Initiative (TAI), Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ), The Mona School of Business and Management, and the Access to Information Unit of Jamaica.

Climate Justice Dialogue

Kevin Lustig — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 16:31:26 -0500

At COP 17 in Durban, governments agreed to launch a new round of negotiations that will result in adoption of a new agreement in 2015 under the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change. To capitalize on the promise of Durban and to build an atmosphere of trust and reciprocity between countries, issues of equity will have to be discussed and reshaped in an open and constructive manner. The World Resources Institute (WRI) and Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice (MRFCJ) are facilitating the Climate Justice Dialogue to ensure that the new agreement is informed by science, considers the specific needs of the most vulnerable populations, and catalyzes sustainable development.

The Climate Justice Dialogue will feature regional workshops and scenario exercises, a series of working papers and commissioned papers, and a flagship report. This Dialogue will seek to understand and shape the views of political leaders, UNFCCC negotiators, and domestic decision-makers and thought leaders in key countries.

Access to Information Gains Ground in Africa

Tue, 03 Apr 2012 15:48:30 -0400

This piece originally appeared on the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) website.

Access to information is widely recognized as a cornerstone of good governance and an important anti-corruption tool. Almost 100 countries, including 10 in Africa, have national laws or decrees that recognize the public’s right to access information or records from government.

An IDRC-supported initiative launched in 2011 is looking at access to information in three African countries — Ghana, South Africa, and Uganda — through an environmental and natural resource lens. Natural resources drive the national and household economies of these and many other developing countries. Thus, promoting transparency in this sphere is considered key to assuring healthy, prosperous societies.

The “ATI in Africa” initiative is investigating to what extent citizens are gaining access to information through environment and natural resource laws and institutions. The World Resources Institute (WRI), based in Washington, D.C., is working on the two-year effort with three leading research organizations: the Ghana Center for Democratic Development, the Open Democracy Advice Centre in South Africa, and Greenwatch Uganda.

“Africa lags behind on a whole series of indicators associated with access to information,” says Peter Veit, a senior fellow at WRI who is managing the project. “But the good news is there is huge momentum for reform in Africa right now. There are probably more countries discussing, debating, and negotiating ATI bills in Africa than anywhere else in the world.”

Recent progress

Policies and practices to implement the right of access to information began to emerge in Africa only in recent years. The three project countries are at different stages of this process. In 2000, South Africa became the first country on the continent to pass an ATI law. Uganda’s Access to Information Act was enacted in 2005 but has not been fully implemented. After years of debate and a national consultation, a proposed freedom of information bill in Ghana has yet to be passed.

The right of access to information is enshrined in many countries’ constitutions. Even in the absence of comprehensive national ATI legislation, citizens and advocacy groups in Africa have used constitutional provisions or environmental laws to access information.

Research teams in the three focus countries are reviewing court cases and ATI laws, policies, and practices in the energy and natural resource sectors. Which issues arise most often? Which requests for information are most likely to be rejected? For example, is information on high-value natural resources such as oil and minerals more likely to be considered confidential than information on forestry and the environment?

Learning lessons

The teams are also incorporating evidence from Ethiopia, Liberia, Nigeria, and Zimbabwe, as they review the status of ATI laws there. Says Veit: “There’s a real need across the continent for assistance to be provided South-South and North-South on how to draft ATI laws as well as those governing the extraction and use of natural resources — and how to create institutions that can deliver the functions prescribed to them in those laws.”

The researchers are making and monitoring citizens’ ATI requests, and trying to determine the extent to which particular groups can access information. They asked three types of requesters to seek information from governments: a freelance journalist, a so-called “poor citizen,” and an NGO advocate. Preliminary results from Ghana indicate that refusal rates were high for all types of requesters, especially journalists, who had the highest refusal rate of 60%.

Carole Excell, a lawyer and senior associate at WRI, points to another potential hurdle applicants face. “With two exceptions, every African country’s law refers a citizen who makes a request and is refused, to ultimately go to the courts for relief. This has really restricted the ability of citizens and journalists to seek a remedy.” In most cases, she says, having recourse to an independent ombudsman or information commissioner rather than the courts would be simpler, faster, and less costly.

Change on the ground

The researchers hope their findings will be useful to many other countries — and to the African Union as it develops a model ATI law for the whole continent. They also want to help ensure implementation of the declaration approved at the 2011 Pan-African Conference on Access to Information. The African Platform on Access to Information encourages African countries to become more transparent and was developed specifically to recognize the context and needs of African countries.

The research partners will make their work freely available to other researchers and governments, to support the creation of robust ATI laws throughout Africa. They also hope to encourage better information storage and retrieval in the region by fostering stronger and clearer laws on document archiving.

“Change on the ground is most important,” Excell says. “Our African partners want research that leads to results in policies, practices, and legal reforms.”

Map: Candice Schibli/WRI

Threats to Village Land in Tanzania: Implications for REDD+ Benefit- Sharing Arrangements

Peter Veit — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:28:02 -0500

This piece originally appeared in Lessons About Land Tenure, Forest Governance and REDD+: Case Studies from Africa, Asia and Latin America.¹ The full text of the article is available here.

Abstract

REDD+ presents an important opportunity for Tanzania to leverage its forest resources to bring in new capital flows, promote forest management and provide benefits to communities. With a legal framework designed to promote decentralization and more than a decade of experience with Participatory Forest Management, the country appears ready to capitalize on REDD+.

On closer examination, however, villagers face multiple obstacles in securing rights over land and realizing forest benefits. This paper examines five challenges—classification of General Land; recognition of Village Land; recognition of village government; transfer of Village Land to General or Reserved Land; and Participatory Forest Management procedures. Legal ambiguities and contradictions coupled with inconsistent implementation and governance structures pose unique threats to the success of REDD+ in Tanzania. With REDD+ infrastructure yet to be developed, however, opportunities exist for these challenges to be addressed. The current legal and institutional framework needs clarification and strengthening to make REDD+ a success for all Tanzanians.

Read the full article

Naughton-Treves, L. and C. Day. eds. 2012. Lessons about Land Tenure, Forest Governance and REDD+. Case Studies from Africa, Asia and Latin America. Madison, Wisconsin: UW-Madison Land Tenure Center. ↩

Forest Taxation in Post-1994 Cameroon: Distributional Mechanisms and Emerging Links with Poverty Alleviation and Equity

Maggie Barron — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 15:42:43 -0500

Executive Summary

This report documents a study carried out on the Cameroonian forest taxation system, particularly covering: (i) the distribution practices of the government, as demonstrated through transfers from the central government to the local authorities and from the latter to the local communities; and (ii) the interrelations of these transfers with equality and livelihoods. The study was conducted in the forested zone of Cameroon in 2006. It covers three Rural Councils in the East and Center provinces, with the inclusion of a “non-forested” council in the North-West province. In total, 22 villages and 525 households were targeted by the exploratory work and evaluation.

Numerous villages have yet to benefit from any projects while their forests are exploited, mostly because of lack of responsible management practices and safeguards.

The emphasis on forests in the Millennium Development Goals as well as in the National Strategies for the Reduction of Poverty is an illustration of how political discourse is translated into the economic planning of human well-being. With significant forest resources—the third or the fourth largest by area in the Congo Basin, according to estimates—Cameroon has placed a key emphasis on sustainable use of them to meet national development objectives. Revenues generated by forest taxes constitute one of the options that could help Cameroonian forests contribute to the fight against poverty.

The forest tax system in Cameroon aims at a series of objectives, including: (i) the creation of revenues and of national prosperity; (ii) distributional equity and the reduction of poverty; (iii) fiscal decentralization; and (iv) the inclusion of local communities in access to forest benefits. The Cameroonian forest tax system also brings together a number of mechanisms. One of these, the Annual Forestry Fee, is representative of the political desire of the central government to use part of the revenues generated by logging activities to improve local development and livelihoods. Since 1999, however, the Annual Forestry Fee does not appear to have led to a significant improvement in the conditions of life at the village or household level in the forested zone. This fee is the primary focus of this report.

The Annual Forestry Fee is an area-based forestry tax and stems from Article 68 of the 1994 Forestry Law and subsequent modifying and accompanying texts. The Annual Forestry Fee is presented as an annual “governmental transfer” towards the Rural Councils and villages—one of the many forest taxes applied in Cameroon. In the logic of the transfer, 50 percent of the annual tax goes to the central government and the other 50 percent is allocated to relevant sub-national parties. The 50 percent allocated to local entities is further divided between the Rural Council with jurisdiction over the forest titles and the village communities surrounding these titles, with a 40:10 ratio, for the execution of socio-economic projects in the villages.

Data shows that from 1999 to 2005 the Annual Forestry Fee generated approximately 70 billion CFA francs (FCFA). The three Rural Councils considered for this study regularly received their share of the Annual Forestry Fee. However, discrepancies were found between the distributed amounts as published at the central level through the Forest Revenue Enhancement Program and the amounts declared as received by the municipal authorities. For instance, in one of these councils, the Rural Council of Mindourou (Eastern province), data from the central level indicates a transfer of 578 million FCFA as the 40 percent allocated to the council in 2004, while the municipal authorities acknowledged a transfer reported at 544 million FCFA. In the Rural Council of Gari-Gombo, figures from the central level indicate a transfer of 321 million FCFA as the 40 percent allocated to the community in 2004, while the municipal authorities acknowledge receipt of approximately 230 million FCFA.

Discrepancies were even greater when the 10 percent of Annual Forestry Fee allocated to the village communities was considered. For example, in 2005, in the Rural Council of Gari- Gombo (Eastern province), the amount registered by the municipal authorities as the village communities’ AFF allotment was only 55 percent of the amount registered by the Forest Revenues Enhancement Program (PSRF ). These discrepancies are indicative of an overall lack of transparency that surrounds the management and redistribution of the Annual Forestry Fee.

Differences also exist in the way the 10 percent actually committed to village communities is disbursed by the Council. In the Rural Council of Mindourou, for instance, each of the 16 villages received 8.5 million FCFA for the implementation of socio-economic projects in 2005, while other councils decided to allocate money according to different and not clearly defined rules.

As far as the impact of the 10 percent is concerned, results show that when data could be gathered the actual money spent on planned activities in a number of villages was found to be less than the amount supposedly allocated. Results show that several of the village-level projects carried out had been over-budgeted and recorded inflated costs, as already found by previous audits done on the Annual Forestry Fee distribution and disbursement.

The distribution and transfer of the Annual Forestry Fee on paper, therefore, does not necessarily reflect the actual execution of socio-economic projects at either the village or Council levels. Numerous villages have yet to benefit from any projects while their forests are exploited, mostly because of lack of responsible management practices and safeguards. As for the councils, this study found—in concordance with previous studies—that the 40 percent was allocated to diverse uses (such as overall administrative costs) and that the first objective of the transfers (local development) has not been an absolute priority. Though exceptions do exist, a swift evaluation of the undertakings in key places of the targeted communities, when data could be found, shows wide discrepancies between the amount allocated under the 40 percent and the actual value of implemented projects or activities.

For the purpose of analysis and comparison, the study calculated the theoretical amount of Annual Forestry Fee allocated per household annually in the three Rural Councils for 2005, based on the amount of the 10 percent actually received by the Rural Council. The resulting figures (18,000 FCFA/household in Mindourdou, 12,500 FCFA/household in Bibey, and 800 FCFA/ household in Gari Gombo) show that there exists asymmetry in the horizontal distribution of the Annual Forestry Fee (i.e., amongst forested Rural Councils) and that overall, the amounts of Annual Forestry Fee allocated per household are often extremely small in relation to median annual household income in Cameroon (340,000 FCFA). Thus, the amounts collected and redistributed annually do not guarantee by themselves that measurable impacts on the incidence of poverty or well-being are occurring.

This study found that the households interviewed perceived themselves as being poorer nowadays than a decade ago (i.e., comparison 1995–2005) in the study area. The perceptions of the local communities were put in context by data collected on basic social services and infrastructure. Results show that close to 96 percent of the villages visited are lacking electricity, 82 percent did not have health centers, 70 percent did not have wells installed and 30 percent did not have a primary school for all grades. In addition, the access that minority pygmy enclaves have to benefits of the Annual Forestry Fee remains marginal.

Furthermore, it is important to note that over the period of time considered by this study (2000-2005), the annual amount of the Annual Forestry Fee grew approximately by 25 percent, while other sources of governmental budget allocation (central government to regional) aimed at poverty reduction declined nationally by 17 percent. Though this inverse relationship would need a deeper analysis to be fully understood, it nonetheless shows that the Annual Forestry Fee not only boosted the budgets of many concerned councils, but it also replaced the money normally disbursed by other state agencies (i.e., the fee acted in part as a substitute and not wholly as additional funds).

The various actors involved in this process have different perceptions of the Annual Forestry Fee, according to interviews conducted across the study sites:

Policy-makers believe the actual system for decentralization of forest tax revenue is an effective tool for local development and poverty reduction;
Mayors generally see the distribution of the Annual Forestry Fee as justice more properly served to local communities who consider the surrounding forest resources to be their own. However, they criticize the many problems with the current Annual Forestry Fee distribution system, including: the delays in delivering the Annual Forestry Fee checks, the discrepancies between the amounts received and those published at the central level, and the inadequacy of the sums received at the Council level from the Annual Forestry Fee, given that all local development concerns fall henceforth to the Rural Councils;
Local administrative authorities have mixed perceptions. When limited to the approbation of council budgets (the 40 percent), their appraisal of the poor results of the forest revenue distribution process remains objective, and they have a negative opinion of the mayors; but when they are involved with the execution of the actual projects conceived, their opinion of the mayors switches to positive;
Local communities believe the distribution and utilization of the Annual Forestry Fee to be unfair and only contribute to increasing the wealth of the State, the mayors and the souspréfets;
Municipal authorities in the non-forested zones focus on equity issues at the national level. Since wood is a national resource, these authorities contend that all Cameroonians should be able to benefit, thus supporting a national realignment of the Annual Forestry Fee redistribution.

In order to address shortcomings in the Annual Forestry Fee distribution process, we propose the following structures and mechanisms:

Increase public information on the amount of Annual Forestry Fee distributed and its impacts;
Monitor the entire process of Annual Forestry Fee distribution and promote transparency in its management;
Improve the Annual Forestry Fee management process and focus on building capacity of those actors responsible for its execution (e.g., mayors, Rural Council members, Village Development Committee representatives);
Develop and implement structures for downward and upward accountability, including enforcement of sanctions, when necessary.

Broken Promises: Forest Revenue-Sharing in Cameroon

Maggie Barron — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 14:37:32 -0500

Executive Summary

In Central Africa, most governments have introduced mechanisms to redirect more of the benefits from the extractive use of forests to the regions where logging is taking place. Several governments are in the process of designing or implementing forestry revenue tax/fee distribution schemes whose objectives are decentralization, poverty alleviation, and promotion of local development. Cameroon has been a leader in this endeavor, with a system that distributes half of its Annual Forestry Fee (referred to herein by its French acronym, RFA [redevance forestière annuelle]) revenues to decentralized public authorities (40%) and villages (10%) that are adjacent to exploited forests. These funds are targeted at furthering local economic development, poverty reduction, and conflict abatement in and among villages adjacent to forests, forestry companies, and the government.

Despite being considered progressive by global standards, Cameroon’s revenue-sharing system is failing to provide the expected benefits to the communities it targets.

This Forest Note summarizes findings from case studies of three rural councils (Bibey, Gari Gombo and Mindourou) and their constituent villages regarding implementation of the RFA revenue-sharing system from 2000-2002. Based on this information and an examination of the strengths and weaknesses of the revenue distribution system, the authors present recommendations to the Government of Cameroon on how to increase the system’s positive impacts on local livelihoods and poverty alleviation and, correspondingly, reduce conflict between villages and forestry companies.

The findings indicate that despite being considered progressive by global standards, in the rural councils addressed through this study, Cameroon’s revenue-sharing system is failing to provide the expected benefits to the communities it targets: those living adjacent to forest concessions. In some cases, revenues did not reach villages at all; in all cases, the amount received by villages was less than what was allocated to them at the national level. Of the almost US $7 million allocated to the three rural councils examined in this study, almost US $2 million is unaccounted for during the period 2000-2004, and of the US $1.7 million allocated for village development within these rural councils, almost US $1 million is unaccounted for during the same time frame. Furthermore, the projects funded were often not those requested by the village representatives, and villagers reported that the costs of these projects were often higher than the accepted cost of implementing such activities by local sources.

Monitoring of the use of revenues by the Ministry of Economy and Finance’s General Treasury and Budget Office was haphazard and made even more problematic by the absence of standardized, transparent accounting systems. Holding decision-makers accountable for the use of funds was difficult, not only because of weak accountability mechanisms but also because of weak law enforcement, lack of political will, capacity, and resources. These factors, among others, resulted in a system that depended primarily on the integrity of the mayor (the head of the elected rural council) and thus provided opportunities for the misappropriation of funds, cronyism, and other forms of corruption.

This study was unable to isolate what impacts, if any, the RFA revenues had on poverty reduction because of the relatively small amount of revenues that reached villages and the lack of comparative data. However, the findings indicate that there is an urgent need to strengthen the governance of the RFA revenue distribution system and the larger system of political representation in which it operates if revenues are to be used effectively for poverty alleviation. This brief builds on previous studies and on findings from three case studies to provide recommendations to the Government of Cameroon on how to improve the RFA revenue-sharing system’s ability to contribute to the government’s poverty reduction objectives.

Recommendations

The Forest Revenues Enhancement Program should set aside 5% to 10% of the total RFA revenues to develop and maintain effective transparency, monitoring, local participation, and accountability mechanisms as well as to build capacity at the various government, rural council, and village levels to implement those mechanisms. More specifically, funds should be provided by the central government from the 50% of the PSRF funds that is not earmarked for the rural councils to:

develop, implement, and enforce standardized accounting systems set up by the Ministry of Economy and Finance. Implemented through the PSRF, these systems would be used by the rural councils and villages to track RFA revenues and expenditures.
strengthen existing auditing systems and build operational capacity to audit rural council RFA expenditures annually (to be implemented by the Ministry of Economy and Finance).
increase the capacity of local villagers to engage effectively in the decision-making process by:
- defining a democratic process for selecting village representatives;
- developing decision-making procedures that ensure effective consideration of village representatives’ priorities;
- providing training in development planning, basic budgeting, and accounting;
- increasing local representation on Forestry Fee Management Committees that determine project funding; and
- establishing Forest Fee Management Committees in villages where they do not exist (to be implemented by the rural councils through their engagement with local nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and the Ministry of Economy and Finance).
build transparency into the use of RFA funds at the rural council and village levels through the posting of RFA revenues and expenditures in public gathering places, printing them in local newspapers and periodicals, and annual meetings with villagers to present and explain expenditures financed by the RFA (to be implemented by the Ministry of Economy and Finance together with the Ministry of Forests and Wildlife). In addition, mayors should be required to publish annually a full list of the projects funded under the RFA with their locations and costs.

The Environmental Committee in the Cameroonian Parliament, in partnership with civil society organizations, should take the lead in ensuring increased accountability in the expenditure of RFA revenues by:

acting as an ombudsman for villages with complaints of RFA revenue mismanagement;
investigating specific cases of the misuse of RFA funds;
holding public hearings, if an RFA audit fails, that involve all the villages in the rural council area so that the leaders can be sanctioned for their failure to use the funds according to existing laws.
commissioning a study of the enforcement chain to identify actions to increase sanctions for the misuse of RFA revenues and to strengthen the enforcement chain.

Maps Guide Water and Sanitation Planning in Africa

Norbert Henninger — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 11:49:03 -0400

State of the art GIS maps shed new light on Uganda’s development challenges.

A primary challenge for government agencies working on water and sanitation issues is coordination – planning and implementing effective interventions across multiple sectors and actors. Data is often siloed, with poverty figures kept separately from information on water access, sanitation, and hygiene.

A new report, Mapping a Healthier Future, published by the Ugandan government with the World Resources Institute, shows how new kinds of mapping can help tackle these coordination problems and lead to more effective interventions. The report compares for the first time various water and sanitation indicators, helping to identify regions and communities with the greatest need and strengthen poverty reduction efforts.

Uganda: Proportion on Households with Improved Sanitation Facilities, 2002 Geographic Information Systems (GIS) maps are valuable tools to help overcome common coordination challenges. Better information means better decisions about how to allocate resources, and a good map can literally put all parties on the same page, opening the door for more efficient, transparent decision-making.

An examination of the spatial relationships between poverty, safe drinking water, improved sanitation, and better hygiene behavior can provide new information to help craft more effective—and more evidence-based—investments and poverty reduction efforts. This kind of spatial information can also empower the public to query government priorities, advocate for alternative interventions, and demand better decision-making.

Uganda’s national policy already reflects the central role safe water and sanitation play in addressing poverty. In 2004, Uganda’s central government set ambitious national targets to increase access to clean water and sanitation to 100% in urban areas and 77% in rural districts by 2015.

So far, these investment plans have helped improve drinking water coverage in rural sub-counties, from 25 percent in the early 1990’s to 65 percent in 2009. However, work remains to be done to ensure that all areas meet national targets. That is where the new maps come in. They can help the government see which communities are lagging behind and target the areas that can benefit the most from interventions.

Combining maps with indicators such as poverty rates, unsafe drinking water sources, lack of sanitation facilities, and lack of basic necessities like soap provides a stark picture of trends and needs across the country. “Data behind the maps show a direct correlation in Uganda between a high poverty rates and low access to adequate sanitation facilities,” said Francis Runumi Mwesigye, Health Planning Commissioner at the Uganda Ministry of Heath and co-author of the report.

Photo credit: flickr/travellingtom

Improved access to clean water is essential for Uganda’s continued development. Water-related diseases, such as typhoid, cholera, and hepatitis, caused 8% of all deaths in Uganda in 2002. Young children are particularly susceptible – 17% of all deaths of children under the age of 5 are contributed to water-borne diarrheal diseases.

The Ugandan example shows what is possible for other counties who want to develop their own maps, and the kind of analysis that is possible with the right data. This report follows Mapping a Better Future, a detailed examination of the links between Uganda’s wetlands and the locations of poor communities.

Mapping a Healthier Future is the result of collaborative efforts between the Uganda Ministry of Health, the Uganda Ministry of Water and Environment, the Uganda Bureau of Statistics, the International Livestock Research Institute, and the World Resources Institute.

Uganda: Percentage of Households That Cannot Afford Soap, 2002

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:31:31 -0400

This map shows the percentage of households that cannot afford to use soap, a measure from the census showing the lack of basic necessities.

Uganda: Percentage of Households Relying on Open Sources of Drinking Water, 2002

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:27:36 -0400

This map shows the percentage of households relying on open sources of drinking water, such as lakes, streams, etc., and therefore at risk of waterborne diseases attributed to unsafe sources.

Uganda: Density of Households Without Improved Sanitation Facilities, 2002

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:23:08 -0400

This map shows the densities of households without access to improved sanitation in each subcounty.

The more darkly shaded areas have the highest density of households without adequate sanitation, and are therefore at higher risk of disease.

Uganda: Poverty Density in Rural Subcounties That Failed HSSP I Target for Improved Sanitation Facilities

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:16:07 -0400

This map displays the poverty density (the number of poor people per square km) for subcounties that had not achieved Uganda’s interim national rural target of 58 percent improved sanitation coverage (HSSP I) in 2002.

The majority of subcounties not reaching the 2002 target have low poverty densities. This is largely related to the lower population densities of northern Uganda. However, a number of subcounties in southeastern Uganda have high numbers of poor people per square kilometer.

Uganda: Poverty Rate in Rural Subcounties That Failed HSSP I Target for Improved Sanitation Facilities

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:11:11 -0400

This map displays the poverty rate (the percent of the population below the poverty line) for subcounties that had not achieved Uganda’s interim national rural target of 58 percent improved sanitation coverage (HSSP I) in 2002.

The brown areas show higher poverty rates, while the green areas represent low poverty rates. The majority of subcounties behind on the HSSP I target have poverty rates above 40 percent with a large number having rates greater than 60 percent.

Uganda: Rural Subcounties That Failed to Reach HSSP I Target for Improved Sanitation Facilicities in 2002

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:52:26 -0400

This map highlights the rural subcounties that had not attained the Uganda’s interim national rural target of 58 percent of improved sanitation coverage (HSSP I) in 2002. Areas in white had achieved the target.

Uganda: Proportion on Households with Improved Sanitation Facilities, 2002

Maggie Barron — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 16:39:20 -0400

This map shows the spatial distribution of improved sanitation coverage data by subcounty.

Planners can use this map to identify areas of progress as well as underachieving locations. It can also help to locate areas where the coverage rate of improved sanitation is just below 75 percent, which research indicates may be a sanitation threshold.