GOLD Report I - UCLG

73The most far-reaching management reformsaffecting local government in theregion have been in New Zealand wherethe 2002 Local Government Act requiresboth annual and long-term plans as wellas systematic consideration of outcomesfor local communities. It also prescribesprinciples for public consultation includingtransparent presentation of proposals,options and procedures. MostAustralian states have introducedsystems of performance managementfor local government, including performanceindicators and other benchmarkingstrategies. In particular, theintroduction of accrual accounting hashad a major impact on local governmentmanagement because of the requirementto value assets and make adequateprovision for depreciation. Elsewherein some countries of the region, significantdecentralization programs havecreated severe strains on the managementcapacity of local governments asthey try to cope with the administrativechallenges caused by the rapid transferof central government responsibilitiesand personnel.The challenges of limited capacity andresources that all local governmentsface are amplified in urban areas. Theproblems of urban management are morecomplex and the potential for disaster(natural and man-made) is greater.Environmental problems are particularlysevere, with inadequate capacity to treathuman and industrial waste, severecontamination of water sources andserious air pollution from both industrialactivity and the rapid growth of motorvehicles. Although city governmentsmay be better able to recruit qualifiedstaff compared to rural local governments,their capacity to regulate developmentand to effectively controlenvironmental risks remains quite limited.Similarly, although city governmentsmay have access to much greaterfiscal resources than rural governments,their need for resources is also muchgreater, since infrastructure and servicesare likely to be much more expensive.In turn, inadequate physicalinfrastructure is often a major impedimentto industrial development and urbaneconomic growth, on which nationaleconomic development depends.In its report on urbanization and sustainabilityin Asia (ADB 2006a), the AsianDevelopment Bank identified a numberof examples of good urban governancein 12 countries in the region. Theseinclude: innovative approaches to revenuemobilization and capital financing;improved administration and performance-orientedmanagement; increasedavailability of information and transparencyof decision-making; greater citizenparticipation in decision-making;collaboration between municipalitieswithin the metropolitan area or economicsub-region; serious attempts to tackleenvironmental problems andeffectively enforce pollution controls;significant programs to address urbanpoverty, and support to communitybasedservice improvements. However,such initiatives have been the exception.In all such cases, local leadership hasbeen the critical factor: leadership thatis committed to reform and to improvingmunicipal conditions, is effective inmobilizing support for such initiativesand is responsive and accountable tolocal citizens. Developing such civicleadership across the region remains amajor challenge.Decentralization reforms and associated greaterlocal level autonomy require major capacitybuilding and training interventions forlocal government personnel in the Asia-Pacificregion (Brillantes 2006). As shown in Table 9,such training and capacity-building programsin the selected countries of the region oftenform part of each country’s overall civil serviceand policy frameworks. It is noteworthythat Korea, a country that has emphasizedknowledge management as a core element ofthe development process, is pursuing capa-Decentralizationreforms andassociated greaterlocal levelautonomy requiremajor capacitybuilding andtraininginterventions forlocal governmentpersonnel in theAsia-Pacific region