136
5.3.2 The Accountability Framework.
A broad approach to good governance puts accountablity at its centre. The so- called accountability framework focuses on the obligations of those given authority
to conduct the business of government called agents to those responsible for oversight of the agents called principals” . n a democracy, the people are
ultimately responsible for choosing the government through elections and for the policies that are made and carried out for the public good. Elected offcials
are therefore accountable to the public. Elected officials oversee the agencies of government charged with formulating and implementing policy, and these in turn
supervise lower-level agents who carry out the specific activities of government. Transparency is a key requirement for effective oversight and accountability
at every level. Without it the public and their elected representatives cannot know what government agencies are doing. Various institutions in civil society
including the media and academia, play important intermediary roles in gathering, interpreting, and disseminating information to the public. They also champion
and advocate the interests and aspirations of particular groups and the general public to policy-makers. n the context of REDD, transparency and accountability
are important to enable buyers and sellers of carbon credits to enter into efficient transactions with confidence. They are also important to build support for REDD
among stakeholders and the general public.
5.3.3 Governance at National and Sub-National Levels.
While accountability and other principles of good governance apply at all levels of government, it is also important to differentiate the roles and responsibilities of
various institutions across sectors and at different levels of government. Generally, institutions at higher levels of governance are more effective at establishing
common systems, standards, and regulatory frameworks; providing oversight to ensure quality and compliance at lower levels; and protecting rights and enforcing
laws and regulations at all levels. n the context of REDD, these will include agencies responsible at the national
level for setting forest policies, laws and regulations; for national development planning including cross-sectoral coordination; for environmental policies and
regulations; for law enforcement and adjudication; for budget allocation and financial regulation and oversight. Civil society organizations, the media, and
the private sector will also play important roles in national-level governance as well as in linking national and sub-national actors and institutions through their
local branches and affiliations. Some new institutions or new roles for existing ones will also be developed specifically for REDD: forest monitoring and carbon
accounting; REDD project accreditation; and supervision of REDD payments. nstitutions at lower levels are better placed to manage resources or respond
directly to the needs of resource users; to establish and enforce local rules for
]
World Bank, .
137
resource management and governance, including tenure; and to resolve local disputes. As noted elsewhere in this report, regional and local-level institutions
play an immediate and direct role in dealing with most of the proximate causes of deforestation--illegal logging, encroachment, illegal and quasi-legal logging and
land-clearing , so it is important that they be given the capacity, authority, and flexibility to do so, with proper oversight and support from national authorities.
Since most environmental problems such as deforestation and degradation have complex causes acting at different levels, governance solutions can benefit from
institutional arrangements that link actors and decision-makers at multiple levels. Groups and institutions at different levels—local, landscape, regional, national
and beyond—each have a degree of autonomy to exercise authority within a specified geographic area, but each is linked to others that provide information,
oversight, higher-level authority, and other functions. Some units are general- purpose governments or communities, while others are specialized agencies,
private associations, or corporations. Local forest users in such hierarchical or nested systems of governance have
some authority to make and enforce rules, especially for their members. They are backed up by higher-level authorities who protect users rights, enforce laws,
and provide oversight. Because no one approach or set of rules will necessarily be the best in all local situations, local units are encouraged to experiment and adapt
to their circumstances within broader framework. igher-level institutions can help with information sharing among the local units and provide scientific and
technical support through research, extension, and basic education. The following principles, expressed as questions to guide decision-making, can
help formulate policies that encourage robust governance of natural resources : . ow can we better define the boundaries of this resource, and of the individuals
who are using it, so as to make clear who is authorized to harvest and where harvesting is authorized?
. ow can we clarify the relationship between the benefits received and the contributions to the costs of sustaining this system?
. ow can we enhance the participation of those involved in making key decisions about this system?
. Who is monitoring this system and do they face appropriate incentives given the challenge of monitoring?
. What are the sanctions we are authorizing and can they be adjusted so that someone who makes an error or a small rule infraction is sufficiently warned so
as to ensure longer-term compliance without our trying to impose unrealistic sanctions?
. What local and regional mechanisms exist to resolve conflicts arising over `the use of this resource?
]
Ostrum E., particularly Chapter
138
. Are there functional and creative efforts by local appropriators to craft effective stewardship mechanisms for local resources that should be recognized?
. ow can a sustainable, multiple-layer, polycentric system be created that is dynamic, adaptive, and effective?
Robust forest governance is undermined by attempting to impose a uniform solution to a wide variety of problems in different circumstances instead of
enabling participants to experiment, learn, and adapt. Threats can also arise from corruption and other opportunistic behavior, especially where external funding is
plentiful and relatively unrestricted, and from the lack of large-scale institutional arrangements to support monitoring, information-sharing, and conflict resolution.
Local governments can assist initiatives that build institutions such as watershed councils, community-based natural resource management bodies. owever,
they need models of how such institutions work as well as help with facilitation, especially to engage local community groups. Political encouragement is also
important, both from above national government in the form of policies and incentives, and from below, in the form of vocal support from constituents.
Facilitation and demonstration of models can be done by NGOs, research institutions, and private firms such as those engaged in certification. A consortium
of several such organizations with complementary skills and networks can draw on a wider range of models and resources, and a consortium can form the basis
for building robust, multi-stakeholder, multi-level forest governance institutions. A good communications strategy is important to disseminate information about
the applicability of potential models and to give voice to constituents needs and aspirations.
Decentralized decision-making for REDD management also requires dedicated research to uncover and explain the relevant drivers and how they operate in
different areas, including research on economic and other incentives, institutional constraints, and human-environment interactions. The results of this research
can be used to guide adaptive management of REDD interventions and to learn how to design better REDD projects.
5.4 The Situation In Indonesia
Kategori