CHAPTER 3: BACKGROUND
3.3. Local Government
3.3.3 Local Government Capacity
One of the greatest challenges facing local government in many developing countries is the formulation and implementation of appropriate environmental policies (Babu 2000). This is largely due to a lack of the capacity to design and implement effective policies to prevent the degradation and promote the sustainable use of their natural resources. Cloete (2002) defines capacity as the ability to perform tasks effectively, efficiently, and sustainably. Capacity building is seen as the ability to mobilise the available resources in order to achieve a particular task. However, capacity is difficult to define because the way in which it is defined determines which characteristics are said to be present
or absent. In the context of this research, capacity can be seen in terms of three interrelated components. These are individual, institutional, and environmental components of capacity (DPLG 2004).
Individual Capacity
Individual capacity refers to the “potential and competency, or lack thereof that is found within a person” (DPLG 2004: 12). This potential and competency is generally reflected in a person’s technical and generic skills, knowledge, attitude and behaviour, as well as education, training, values and experience. This is the reason that local government is required by several pieces of legislation, such as the Skills Development Act (Act 97 of 1998) to appoint suitable people and to develop their existing human resource capacity through initiatives, such as training or education (RSA 1998c).
The first challenge facing local government is the lack of individual capacity. The lack of competence within municipalities is due to several factors, such as inexperience, poor job descriptions, the appointment of staff into incorrect positions, inadequate technical skills, knowledge and expertise, and poor attitude or behaviour (Walmsley 2005; DPLG 2004; Cloete 2002). This situation is compounded by the work overload, high staff turnover, and ineffective legal and institutional frameworks that environmental authorities have to work in. These problems are largely due to the high number of senior public officials with expertise and experience that left during the transformation of local government and replaced by staff with less skills and experience. Walmsley (2005) argues that even experienced public officials find it difficult to make consistent decisions between long-term resource losses and short-term economic growth. This is the reason that junior staff would find it difficult to balance development against the three pillars of sustainable development and environmental justice.
An ethics survey was conducted in 2002 by the University of Stellenbosch to determine the ethical concerns of several stakeholders involved in environmental decision making in Cape Town (Hattingh and Seeliger 2003). The stakeholders included community-based Non Government Organisations (NGOs), municipal politicians, businessmen and developers, environmental consultants, researchers, and scientists. Provincial and local public officials were also included in the survey. The ethics survey found that in general decision makers were seen as being poorly qualified or experienced to make many of the important environmental decisions that they were confronted with (Hattingh and Seeliger
2003). Only 38% of the respondents indicted that public officials were seen as being competent. The respondents indicated that the lack of competence left officials open to persuasion because they had to depend on environmental consultants to educate them so that they can make decisions and provide the consultants with meaningful feedback. However, Babu (2000) found that the strengthening of local capacity through training was more effective in dealing with complex environmental problems than continuously relying on professional or outside institutions. This was because public officials are able to use policy information more effectively in decision making processes if they have been meaningfully involved in the generation of the information.
Institutional Capacity
Institutional capacity refers to the “potential and competency, or lack thereof, found within organisations” (DPLG 2004: 12). This potential and competence refers to strategic leadership, institutional memory, partnerships, and inter-governmental relations. Cloete (2002) integrates elements, such as institutional responsibility, ethics, and accountability into the definition of institutional capacity.
The second challenge facing local government is the lack of institutional capacity. There are several factors which affect institutional capacity, such as insufficient support staff, the inability to attract appropriate people, poor operational structures, systems and structures, and institutional memory (Walmsley 2005; DPLG 2004; Cloete 2002). Institutional memory in this situation refers to the prevailing ideologies, cultures, and modes of decision making within a particular municipality.
Institutional incapacity can be illustrated using an adaptation of the concept of the ‘ingenuity gap’
(Hattingh et al. 2003). In Figure 3.4 the demand for capacity constitutes two components. The first is technical capacity, such as scientific expertise and experience, and secondly, social capacity or the ability to negotiate between competing stakeholders, negotiate agreements, and sustain political legitimacy. The growing complexity of environmental problems increases the demand for capacity, while the supply of capacity is decreasing. The supply of capacity is decreasing because of several reasons, such as the overloading of institutions or the loss of public officials to the private sector. The gap between the demand and supply of capacity can be seen as the capacity gap.
Figure 3.4: The capacity gap within local government (adapted from Hattingh et al. 2003)
Babu (2000) found that many developing countries, especially those in Southern Africa do not have certain departments, such as environmental departments at the local level. This is the reason that environmental policies are often passed on to other departments, such as town-planning, were there is sufficient capacity. This situation represents an inefficient use of those departments’ resources. It is also undesirable because that particular department may integrate its mandates into those policies.
This creates a cyclical situation within developing countries of uninformed decision making.
Rossouw and Wiseman (2004) argue that it is not only within departments that there is a lack of institutional capacity, but also in the integration and cross sectoral linkages between departments. The University of Stellenbosch ethics survey found that 85% of respondents indicated that local authorities and provincial authorities, as well as the heads of departments, do not work together in environmental decision making (Hattingh and Seeliger 2003).
Environmental Capacity
The final component, environmental capacity refers to the socio-political context of the municipality.
The DPLG (2004: 13) defines environmental capacity as the “potential and competency, or lack thereof, found outside of municipalities formal structures”. This capacity refers to elements that the municipality has very little or no influence on, but need to act upon. These elements include the socio-economic demography of the municipality, the political, legislative or social capacity of civil society, and natural or environmental issues.
Demand for capacity
Supply of capacity
‘Capacity gap’
Complex environmental problems
The final challenge facing local government is a lack of environmental capacity. The factors which affect environmental capacity include balancing poverty, development and ecological priorities, spatial transformation, weak structures to incorporate civil society into decision-making, and overlapping or unclear national and provincial legislation (Walmsley 2005; DPLG 2004; Cloete 2002). In South Africa, local government faces increasing pressure from local communities which demand services and transformation. However, this pressure may actually weaken the municipality further. Babu (2000) argues that in order for a policy to be effectively formulated and implemented it needs to be consistent with the economic and political environment of that particular country or region. For example in South Africa, policy has to be sensitive to South Africa’s unique social, economic, and political context.
The ability of local government to produce appropriate environmental policies is often undermined by the ambiguity in the policy process itself. There tends to be ambiguity between the autonomy of the local state as an independent political institution and its role as an administrative or managerial body of central government responsible for implementing national policies, such as GEAR (Chipkin 2002).
The University of Stellenbosch ethics survey found that 86% of respondents indicated that political pressure cause hasty development decisions to be made and 85% said that politicians promote development decisions that are politically motivated rather than environmentally informed (Hattingh and Seeliger 2003).
The large number of often overlapping and conflicting pieces of legislation is another challenge which affects local government. This is because public officials have to develop environmental policies that integrate all the relevant legislation. Section 3.3.4 outlines the national and local legislation that influences municipal environmental policy making processes.