Open Local Government (RO0049)

What is the public problem that the
commitment will address?
At the level of the local public administration
authorities, the degree of information and
engagement on open government is low. There are
initiatives and examples of good practice, but in the
absence of better communication and dissemination
of information, they are not replicated at the local
government level.
Commitment description
What is the commitment?
Starting from the set of OGP principles,
recommendations for open local government were
developed and an enrolment session will open in a
pilot program with 8 administrative-territorial units
based on the OGP Local Program model.
How will the commitment contribute to
solve the public problem?
- Increasing the number of local public
administration authorities committing to specific
measures for implementing OGP values;
- Increasing the number of social actors involved in
the decision-making process.
Why is this commitment relevant to OGP
values?
Increasing the involvement of local public
administration authorities in the OGP process, as
well as citizen engagement in the decision-making
process of these authorities.
Milestone activity with a verifiable
deliverable
Responsible agency /
partner
Start Date: End Date:
Regional information sessions for
promoting the Open Government
MDRAP 2018 2018
10
Recommendations for Local Authorities (8
sessions - 111 local public authorities)
Implementation by the selected
authorities of local action plans for their
proposed projects with the support of the
OGP central unit and NGOs already
involved in the OGP process:
i. Local consultations;
ii. Identifying local level issues and
priorities by involving all stakeholders;
iii. Establishing local teams for
developing and implementing
collaborative projects / solutions.
MDRAP January
2019
September
2019
Awarding the OGP at the local level Best
Practice Award
MDRAP October
2019
Additional information
Correlation with other government
programs/strategies
National Anticorruption Strategy
Budget required (lei): Resources were allocated through the EU funded
project "Strengthening Integrity Systems - the Best
Strategy to Prevent Corruption in Public
Administration", SIPOCA 61, managed by DIBGPP.

2. Open Government at local level

Commitment Text: "Starting from the set of OGP principles, recommendations for open local government were developed and an enrolment session will open in a pilot program with 8 administrative-territorial units based on the OGP Local Program model."

Commitment Milestones:

2. • Regional information sessions for promoting the Open Government Recommendations for Local Authorities (8 sessions - 111 local public authorities)
   • Implementation by the selected authorities of local action plans for their proposed projects with the support of the OGP central unit and NGOs already involved in the OGP process: (i) Local consultations; (ii) Identifying local level issues and priorities by involving all stakeholders; (iii) Establishing local teams for developing and implementing collaborative projects / solutions.
   • Awarding the OGP at the local level Best Practice Award

Start Date: 2018

End Date: October 2019

Editorial Note: The commitment text is abridged. The full text can be found in the OGP 2018-2020 national action plan.

Context and Objectives

The Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP) conducts yearly monitoring activities of the implementation of Romania’s National Anticorruption Strategy (SNA) 2016-2020. [14] These monitoring rounds show that at the level of the local public administration authorities, the degree of information provision, and engagement on open government is low. [15] This commitment, a continuation of Commitment 9 from the previous plan (2016-2018), aims to: (1) increase the number of local public authorities committed to implementing OGP values and (2) increase the number of social actors (e.g., local civil society organizations) involved in the decision-making process. The latter makes the commitment clearly relevant to citizen participation, while the former, by pressing local public administrations to apply the 2017 "Guide for Open Government Partnership at the Sub-national level," [16] supports the access to information.

The commitment proposes three verifiable milestones. However, the planned activities are of minor potential impact because:

• Some of the 111 local public administrations had already been given technical support [17] on their open governance projects, during earlier on-site visits. [18] Moreover, some (e.g., Timisoara and Oradea) have already taken steps to further OGP principles locally. The MDRAP representative argued that training sessions are essential to helping local civil servants internalize the concept of open governance and putting additional institutional pressure on them to adhere to the Guide’s recommendations. [19] Nevertheless, the commitment does not specify the amount of local action plans that need to be implemented, and does set minimum targets for action plan developments. Moreover, while institutional pressure is important, the potential impact of this activity, when the trained sample is 3.5 percent of the 3,228 total public administration, is limited.
• Similarly, while MDRAP will launch a call for local civil society organizations to attend the information sessions, the experience of collaborating with civil society organizations on the SNA, suggests few will participate. [20]
• Finally, the competition is sponsored through an EU cofounded project, aiming to create a network of good practices and to reward and to disseminate them. [21] In the presence of "sticks," in the form of a periodic monitoring on the progress made on implementing the SNA, the "carrot" of a prize may offer a complementary motivation for the local public administrations that perform above average. [22]

Next steps

This commitment is important considering the opaque governance of local public authorities, and the decision making, acquisition, and spending of public funds (additionally illustrated through Commitment 10 in this action plan). As the training sessions were also used as sources of inspiration as to how to best further OGP values at the local level, [23] the following recommendations can help improve the commitments’ implementation as well as the design if continued in the next action plan:

• Reach more administrations. MDRAP and SGG should extend the training to reach more than the 3.5 percent of the total local public administrations currently proposed by this commitment by providing more (in-person) trainings, using online tools, or by selecting trainers among the "Integrity Champions" to dissipate the knowledge to the neighboring administrations.
• Consult more diverse administrations. MDRAP and SGG could connect with, train, and consult with "noninterested" local public administrations (not only with the 111 that self-selected themselves into the program). To this end, they can identify the administrations with the poorest performance in the annual SNA monitoring rounds.
• Understand why some CSOs are no longer engaging. MDRAP could consult with previously cooperative civil society organizations (in the context of the SNA-monitoring activities) who are not eager to engage now, to identify and resolve ongoing issues and restart cooperation with the civil society.
• Promote evidence-based civic engagement efforts. Earlier IRM suggestions and recent academic work [24] suggest that public servants need to first open governance and then solicit the collaboration of civil society. To this end, MDRAP could encourage local public administrations to first credibly commit to opening governance (e.g., by opening sample datasets) before attempting to forge partnerships and build collaborative projects.
• Set open governance targets to the 111 local public administrations and beyond. MDRAP and SGG could monitor the open governance performance of local public administrations on an annual basis, and then impose targets for local action plans to further the OGP values, especially among the 111 trained administrations.
• Allow civil society to co-select the indicators and co-validate performance. In order to avoid a "box-ticking" exercise, MDRAP and SGG could motivate local CSOs to co-select the open governance targets and co-validate the performance of their local administrations.

[14] The National Anticorruption Strategy 2016-2020 is available [in Romanian] at https://bit.ly/2Nt7pd8.

[15] The MDRAP monitoring reports are available [in Romanian] at https://bit.ly/2LAiG92.

[16] Guvernul Romaniei, Centrul pentru Inovare Publică, Smart City Timișoara (2017) "Recomandări privind Parteneriatul pentru Guvernare Deschisă la nivel local", available [in Romanian] at https://bit.ly/2VOZTsh.

[17] The MDRAP representative argued that the MDRAP gives (1) Direct Technical Assistance (e.g., support during on-sight visits), and (2) Indirect Technical Assistance (e.g., email and telephone support) through the SNA.

[18] Interview with Andreea Grigore, Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP), 19 April 2019.

[19] Interview with Andreea Grigore, MDRAP, 19 April 2019.

[20] Ibid.

[21] "Reteaua Campionilor Competition", MDRAP, 1 July 2019, available [in Romanian] at https://bit.ly/2xvyilV.

[22] "Carrot and Stick Approach of Motivation", Business Jargons, available at https://bit.ly/2k7UU9a.

[23] Interview with Andreea Grigore, Ministry of Regional Development and Public Administration (MDRAP), on 4 September 2019.

[24] Rodrik, D. (2013) "When ideas trump interests: preferences, world views, and policy innovations", Institute for Advanced Studies, working papers, available at https://bit.ly/2YyKoqi.

2. Open government at local level

Substantial

Specialists from the Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration (MDLPA) and from SGG trained 111 local public authorities (out of 3,228 in Romania) in eight one-day sessions from May to July 2019. Several academics and NGOs also attended the trainings. [1] Prior to the start of the action plan, MLPDA had already begun providing technical support to some of the 111 local public administrations on their open governance projects during earlier on-site visits. [2] MDLPA inquired into the potential impediments these administrations face to understand how best to support them, such as the need to develop a Cloud service to host all websites of the local public administration in a standardized way. [3] However, little progress was made in the implementation of local action plans by the trained local public authorities (as originally planned in the action plan) [4] aside from the above-mentioned technical support offered by MDLPA.

MDLPA informed the local public administration of the “OGP at the Local Level - Best Practice Award” competition and published the competition rulebook on its website. 11 local public administrations won the competition in 2019 [5] and eight won in 2020. [6] The winning titles are listed on the OGP repository. [7]