The Viet Nam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI) Measuring Citizens Experiences

Transcription

1 The Viet Nam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI) 2011 Measuring Citizens Experiences Bangkok, December 27-28, 2012

2 Contents What is PAPI? What does PAPI measure? An Overview of National Trends Observed in PAPI 2011 An Overview of Provincial Performance Correlation between PAPI and Other Parameters Policy Implications of PAPI

3 What is PAPI? What does PAPI measure?

4 What is PAPI?

5 Composition of PAPI 2011

6 An Overview of National Trends Observed in PAPI 2011

7 Current Household Economic Situation

8 Awareness of Grassroots Democracy

9 Awareness of Land Use Plans At Local Levels

10 Awareness of Poor Household Lists

11 Corruption and Bribery in Public Sector

12 Nepotism in State Employment

13 People-Elected Monitoring Institutions People s Inspection Boards Community Investment Supervision Boards

14 Citizen s Satisfaction Levels with Selected Administrative Procedures

15 Citizen s Satisfaction Levels Public Hospital Services

16 Citizen s Satisfaction Levels with Education Services

17 An Overview of Provincial Performance

18 Aggregate PAPI 2011 Dashboard Some degree of uniformity in performance levels. Diversity in socioeconomic conditions of high and low performers Dimension 6 on Public Service Delivery features as area of strength Other dimensions lagging behind

19 Control Panel of Provincial Performance by Dimensions

20 Aggregate Un-weighted PAPI 2011

21 Quang Binh BRVT Long An Quang Tri Ha Tinh Son La Nam Dinh Lang Son Binh Dinh Hoa Binh Tien Giang Thanh Hoa Hai Duong Da Nang Ha Noi Dong Thap Ben Tre HCMC Nghe An Thai Binh Binh Duong Bac Kan Binh Phuoc Gia Lai Vinh Phuc Thai Nguyen Quang Nam Ha Nam Dong Nai Phu Tho Yen Bai Dak Nong Bac Ninh Kon Tum Can Tho Vinh Long Tuyen Quang Dak Lak Quang Ninh Bac Giang Lao Cai Ca Mau TT-Hue Hai Phong Khanh Hoa Kien Giang Soc Trang Lam Dong Ninh Thuan Dien Bien Quang Ngai Hau Giang Hung Yen Lai Chau Bac Lieu Ninh Binh Binh Thuan An Giang Phu Yen Cao Bang Tay Ninh Ha Giang Tra Vinh Unweighted PAPI (with 95% CI) th percentile percentile

22 Mapping of Provincial Performance by PAPI 2011 Best performers: Quang Binh, Ba Ria Vung Tau, Long An, Quang Tri, Ha Tinh, Son La, Nam Dinh, Lang Son, Binh Dinh, Hoa Binh, Tien Giang, Thanh Hoa, Hai Duong, Da Nang, Ha Noi and Dong Thap Poor performers: Ninh Thuan, Dien Bien, Quang Ngai, Hau Giang, Hung Yen, Lai Chau, Bac Lieu, Ninh Binh, Binh Thuan, An Giang, Phu Yen, Cao Bang, Tay Ninh, Ha Giang and Tra Vinh.

23 Aggregate Weighted PAPI 2011

24 Participation at the Local Level (Dimension 1) Son La Quang Binh Hoa Binh Lang Son Ba Ria Vung Tau Bac Ninh Binh Dinh Quang Tri Ben Tre Long An Ha Noi Tien Giang Dak Nong Can Tho Hai Duong Phu Tho Ha Tinh Bac Giang Bac Kan Lao Cai Thanh Hoa Quang Ninh Gia Lai Vinh Phuc Dong Nai Binh Phuoc Nghe An Nam Dinh Khanh Hoa Ha Nam Thai Binh Quang Nam Cao Bang Thai Nguyen Da Nang Thua Thien Hue Kon Tum Lam Dong Vinh Long Tuyen Quang Dong Thap Hai Phong Lai Chau Yen Bai TP. Ho Chi Minh Hung Yen Dak Lak Kien Giang Binh Duong Ninh Thuan Quang Ngai Hau Giang Soc Trang Ninh Binh Ha Giang An Giang Dien Bien Ca Mau Phu Yen Tra Vinh Bac Lieu Tay Ninh Binh Thuan Civic Knowledge Opportunities for Participation Quality of Elections Contributions

25 Provincial Performance in Participation at Local Levels by Quartiles Best performers: Son La, Quang Binh, Hoa Binh, Lang Son, Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Bac Ninh, Binh Dinh, Quang Tri, Ben Tre, Long An, Ha Noi, Tien Giang, Dak Nong, Can Tho, Hai Duong and Phu Tho Poor performers: Binh Duong, Ninh Thuan, Quang Ngai, Hau Giang, Soc Trang, Ninh Binh, Ha Giang, An Giang, Dien Bien, Ca Mau, Phu Yen, Tra Vinh, Bac Lieu, Tay Ninh and Binh Thuan

26 Transparency (Dimension 2) Ba Ria Vung Tau Ha Tinh Nam Dinh Son La Lang Son Quang Binh Long An Quang Tri Yen Bai Binh Phuoc TP. Ho Chi Minh Gia Lai Ha Noi Hoa Binh Thanh Hoa Thai Nguyen Nghe An Ben Tre Hai Duong Dak Nong Tien Giang Thai Binh Lao Cai Dak Lak Bac Kan Dien Bien Quang Nam Binh Dinh Ha Nam Quang Ninh Tuyen Quang Khanh Hoa Cao Bang Can Tho Bac Giang Dong Thap Binh Duong Ca Mau Da Nang Dong Nai Vinh Phuc Thua Thien Hue Hai Phong Quang Ngai Bac Ninh Ninh Binh Kon Tum Lai Chau Vinh Long Hung Yen Phu Tho Phu Yen An Giang Soc Trang Binh Thuan Ha Giang Hau Giang Kien Giang Bac Lieu Ninh Thuan Tay Ninh Lam Dong Tra Vinh Poverty Lists Communal Budgets Land-Use Plan/Pricing

27 Provincial Performance in Transparency by Quartiles Best performers: Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Ha Tinh, Nam Dinh, Son La, Lang Son, Quang Binh, Long An, Quang Tri, Yen Bai, Binh Phuoc, Ho Chi Minh City, Gia Lai, Ha Noi, Hoa Binh, Thanh Hoa and Thai Nguyen Poor performers: Tra Vinh, Lam Dong, Tay Ninh, Ninh Thuan, Bac Lieu, Kien Giang, Hau Giang, Ha Giang, Binh Thuan, Soc Trang, An Giang, Phu Yen, Phu Tho, Hung Yen and Vinh Long

28 Vertical Accountability (Dimension 3) Quang Tri Quang Binh Ha Tinh Thai Binh Nghe An Nam Dinh Hai Duong Long An Ha Nam Hoa Binh Binh Dinh Quang Ninh Thanh Hoa Dong Thap Phu Tho Lang Son Binh Phuoc Son La Da Nang Tien Giang Ha Noi Bac Kan Yen Bai Vinh Phuc Kon Tum Quang Ngai Lao Cai Dak Nong Can Tho Bac Ninh Thai Nguyen Dak Lak Ba Ria Vung Tau Lam Dong Ninh Thuan Dien Bien Bac Giang Binh Thuan Gia Lai Quang Nam Vinh Long Binh Duong Tuyen Quang Thua Thien Hue Kien Giang Khanh Hoa Hau Giang TP. Ho Chi Minh Phu Yen Lai Chau Tay Ninh Ca Mau Soc Trang Hung Yen Dong Nai Ben Tre Tra Vinh Ninh Binh Bac Lieu Ha Giang Cao Bang Hai Phong An Giang Interactions With Local Authorities People's Inspection Boards Community Investment Boards

29 Provincial Performance in Vertical Accountability by Quartiles Best performers: Quang Tri, Quang Binh, Ha Tinh, Thai Binh, Nghe An, Nam Dinh, Hai Duong, Long An, Ha Nam, Hoa Binh, Binh Dinh, Quang Ninh, Thanh Hoa, Dong Thap, Phu Tho and Lang Son Poor performers: Cao Bang, Hai Phong, An Giang, Phu Yen, Lai Chau, Tay Ninh, Ca Mau, Soc Trang, Hung Yen, Dong Nai, Ben Tre, Tra Vinh, Ninh Binh, Bac Lieu and Ha Giang

30 Control of Corruption in the Public Sector (Dimension 4) Long An Binh Duong Ca Mau Binh Dinh Dong Thap Soc Trang Tien Giang Ba Ria Vung Tau Quang Nam Ben Tre Lang Son TP. Ho Chi Minh Son La Bac Lieu Tuyen Quang Dong Nai Quang Binh Can Tho Thai Nguyen Binh Thuan Quang Tri Ha Tinh Vinh Phuc Hoa Binh Binh Phuoc Vinh Long Gia Lai Yen Bai Kien Giang Da Nang Nam Dinh Nghe An Lao Cai Ha Nam Phu Tho Kon Tum Hai Duong Thanh Hoa Dak Nong An Giang Ha Noi Hau Giang Quang Ngai Khanh Hoa Thai Binh Hung Yen Phu Yen Bac Kan Dien Bien Dak Lak Bac Giang Lai Chau Thua Thien Hue Lam Dong Ninh Thuan Ninh Binh Tay Ninh Bac Ninh Ha Giang Hai Phong Tra Vinh Quang Ninh Cao Bang Limits on Public Sector Corruption Limits on Corruption in Service Delivery Equity in Employment Willingness to Fight Corruption

31 Provincial Performance in Control of Corruption by Quartiles Best performers: Long An, Binh Duong, Ca Mau, Binh Dinh, Dong Thap, Soc Trang, Tien Giang, Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Quang Nam, Ben Tre, Lang Son, Ho Chi Minh City, Son La, Bac Lieu, Tuyen Quang, Dong Nai Poor performers: Dien Bien, Dak Lak, Bac Giang, Lai Chau, Thua Thien-Hue, Lam Dong, Ninh Thuan, Ninh Binh, Tay Ninh, Bac Ninh, Ha Giang, Hai Phong, Tra Vinh, Quang Ninh, Cao Bang

32 Other types of corruption are of no less significance across the country if provincial star graphs are compared with the perfect one. Types of Corruption Southern provinces seem to be better in mitigating corruption (Soc Trang, Tien Giang, BRVT, Long An, Binh Duong and Dong Thap). Three Municipalities with average performance - Can Tho, HCMC and Da Nang. Two large urban areas as bottom performers - Ha Noi and Hai Phong Bribes for jobs in the public sector seem to be prevalent across the country.

33 Level of Nepotism at the Provincial Level Zero Bac Giang Tra Vinh Cao Bang Son La Lam Dong Ninh Binh Khanh Hoa Vinh Long Phu Yen Dien Bien Quang Ninh Ninh Thuan Ha Giang Bac Ninh Vinh Phuc Yen Bai Thai Binh Ha Tinh TT-Hue Dak Lak Kon Tum Quang Ngai Hai Phong Hai Duong Binh Phuoc Ha Noi Land Registry Commune Justice Officer Policeman Teacher People's Committee Nghe An Dak Nong Bac Kan Ha Nam Gia Lai BRVT Lang Son Soc Trang Quang Tri Can Tho HCMC Bac Lieu Hoa Binh An Giang Quang Binh Hau Giang Hung Yen Lao Cai Lai Chau Thanh Hoa Thai Nguyen Phu Tho Da Nang Dong Nai Tay Ninh Binh Thuan Tuyen Quang Nam Dinh Kien Giang Quang Nam Ben Tre Binh Duong Dong Thap Ca Mau Long An Binh Dinh Nepotism is prevalent across the country in citizens views of state employment in all five sectors While 8 out of the best 10 are southern provinces, half of the bottom group include northern provinces. Tien Giang is the most appreciated province while Bac Giang s point estimate differs hugely. Tien Giang Perfect Nepotism plays a very important role in state employment in all 5 posts measured, with little variance across provinces. This shows the systemic nature of nepotism in employment into the public sector even at the commune level, also the lowest government level.

34 Public Administrative Procedures (Dimension 5) Quang Binh Ba Ria Vung Tau Nam Dinh Da Nang Quang Tri Thanh Hoa Dak Nong Bac Kan Dong Thap Long An Lam Dong Ha Tinh Kon Tum Binh Duong Dong Nai Binh Phuoc Yen Bai Gia Lai TP. Ho Chi Minh Vinh Long Ninh Thuan Ninh Binh Hai Phong Dak Lak Thai Nguyen Tien Giang Phu Tho Binh Dinh Bac Ninh Kien Giang Ha Noi Bac Lieu Ca Mau Bac Giang Nghe An Thai Binh Hung Yen Ben Tre Hau Giang Lang Son Vinh Phuc Tuyen Quang Tay Ninh Dien Bien Ha Nam Son La Hoa Binh Lai Chau Binh Thuan Thua Thien Hue Quang Ninh Cao Bang Phu Yen Soc Trang Hai Duong An Giang Lao Cai Ha Giang Quang Nam Khanh Hoa Quang Ngai Tra Vinh Can Tho Certification Procedures Construction Permit Land Procedures Personal Procedures

35 Provincial Performance in Public Administrative Procedures by Quartiles Best performers: Quang Binh, Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Nam Dinh, Da Nang, Quang Tri, Thanh Hoa, Dak Nong, Bac Kan, Dong Thap, Long An, Lam Dong, Ha Tinh, Kon Tum, Binh Duong, Dong Nai and Binh Phuoc Poor performers: Binh Thuan, Thua Thien-Hue, Quang Ninh, Cao Bang, Phu Yen, Soc Trang, Hai Duong, An Giang, Lao Cai, Ha Giang, Quang Nam, Khanh Hoa, Quang Ngai, Tra Vinh and Can Tho

36 Assessment of Quality of Certification Services (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements; Perfect =100% agreement) Zero Hai Phong Lai Chau Khanh Hoa Tay Ninh Can Tho Ben Tre Hau Giang Ninh Thuan Nghe An Dien Bien Cao Bang Vinh Phuc Binh Thuan Hung Yen Bac Giang An Giang Dong Nai Lam Dong Phu Yen Tra Vinh Da Nang Bac Kan Tuyen Quang Ca Mau Quang Ninh Yen Bai Vinh Long Binh Dinh Tien Giang HCMC Long An Gia Lai Bac Lieu Quang Binh Ha Nam Kien Giang Binh Phuoc Kon Tum Lao Cai Hoa Binh Quang Nam Thai Nguyen Dak Lak Ha Noi TT-Hue Thanh Hoa Dak Nong Lang Son Quang Tri BRVT Soc Trang Bac Ninh Phu Tho Clear Information Fees Displayed Officials Competent Treated w/respect Paperwork Reasonable Clear Deadline Deadline Met Satisfied w/service Small variance across 63 provinces in the quality of certification services. Son La Binh Duong Thai Binh Nam Dinh Ninh Binh Ha Tinh Quang Ngai Ha Giang Hai Duong Dong Thap Perfect Citizens in general are satisfied with the services given at both district and commune levels. However, there are still areas where provinces could improve, including transparency of procedures and fees, red tape in paperwork, and attitude of civil servants.

37 Assessment of Construction Permit Application Procedures (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements; Perfect =100% agreement) Zero Dak Nong Binh Thuan Vinh Phuc Thanh Hoa Vinh Long Dien Bien Lang Son Dong Nai Ha Tinh An Giang Khanh Hoa Lam Dong Binh Phuoc Gia Lai Quang Nam Kon Tum Bac Giang Hai Phong Bac Kan Long An Ha Noi Hoa Binh Da Nang BRVT HCMC Yen Bai Binh Duong Tien Giang Bac Lieu Nghe An Quang Binh Perfect Note: Provinces listed herein are those with more than 15 respondents in the total sample having applied for the construction permits. Clear Information Fees Displayed Officials Competent Treated w/respect Paperwork Reasonable Clear Deadline Deadline Met Satisfied w/service The star graphs reveal an interesting difference across provinces where more than 15 respondents have applied for construction permits. Dak Nong and Binh Thuan perform poorly in all given criteria, Quang Binh and Nghe An do very well in all of the criteria. Vinh Phuc receives complaints from applicants about publicity of application fees, Lang Son about deadlines, Dong Nai about information clarity, deadlines and overall satisfaction, Binh Phuoc about paperwork, while HCMC, though among the best performers is still complained about information clarity.

38 Assessment of LURCs Application Procedures (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Ninh Binh Hung Yen Lao Cai Thai Nguyen Thanh Hoa Dien Bien Ha Tinh Hau Giang Can Tho Vinh Phuc Gia Lai Binh Phuoc Lai Chau An Giang Dak Lak Tuyen Quang Cao Bang Hoa Binh Nghe An Dak Nong Dong Nai Kon Tum Hai Phong Bac Kan Yen Bai Tra Vinh Ha Nam Phu Yen Soc Trang Tay Ninh Ben Tre Ninh Thuan Binh Thuan Bac Giang Binh Dinh Long An Quang Binh Vinh Long HCMC Lang Son Quang Tri Nam Dinh Da Nang Tien Giang Ha Giang Dong Thap BRVT Clear Information Fees Displayed Officials Competent Treated w/respect Paperwork Reasonable Clear Deadline Deadline Met Satisfied w/service Bottom performers are mostly northern provinces, with exception of Hau Giang and Can Tho. Ha Noi seems to perform well in LURCs since citizens are satisfied with all 8 total quality criteria. Ca Mau Binh Duong Lam Dong Hai Duong Ha Noi Perfect Note: Provinces listed herein are those with more than 15 respondents in the total sample having applied for land use rights certificates. Some provinces witness uneven performance levels in the 8 criteria. In particular, Bac Giang civil servants dealing with LURCs for citizens are complained about their competence and attitude. Hai Phong performs in bottom levels, with acute problems regarding timing and fees.

39 Assessment of Commune-level Administrative Procedures (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Dien Bien Lai Chau Quang Ninh Cao Bang Binh Thuan An Giang Khanh Hoa Quang Nam Phu Yen Ha Nam Yen Bai Bac Giang Tuyen Quang Hai Phong Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Phu Tho Can Tho Hung Yen Ninh Thuan Lam Dong Thai Binh Nghe An Lang Son Kon Tum Dong Nai TT-Hue Ha Noi Ha Giang Ca Mau Dak Lak Lao Cai Hau Giang Quang Ngai Binh Phuoc Tra Vinh Tay Ninh Bac Kan Da Nang Thanh Hoa Kien Giang Bac Lieu Son La Hoa Binh Vinh Phuc Vinh Long Binh Dinh Dak Nong HCMC Ben Tre Tien Giang Binh Duong Quang Tri Dong Thap Nam Dinh Ha Tinh Long An Ninh Binh Soc Trang Bac Ninh Quang Binh Hai Duong Clear Information Fees Displayed Officials Competent Treated w/respect Paperwork Reasonable Clear Deadline Deadline Met Satisfied w/service Commune-leveled administrative service seems to have gained recognition from citizens regarding quality of service. BRVT Perfect Small difference in total quality across provinces. The difference between the best performer (Ba Ria Vung Tau) and the poorest performer (Dien Bien) is most striking in all 8 criteria.

40 Public Services Delivery (Dimension 6) Da Nang Hai Phong Ba Ria Vung Tau Quang Binh TP. Ho Chi Minh Long An Ha Noi Quang Tri Lang Son Hai Duong Binh Dinh Vinh Long Kien Giang Thua Thien Hue Ben Tre Vinh Phuc Ninh Thuan Binh Duong Ha Tinh Quang Nam Son La An Giang Thanh Hoa Nam Dinh Bac Lieu Kon Tum Bac Ninh Hau Giang Quang Ninh Dong Thap Khanh Hoa Dong Nai Hoa Binh Soc Trang Lam Dong Thai Binh Tuyen Quang Phu Tho Dak Lak Can Tho Bac Giang Lai Chau Binh Thuan Bac Kan Hung Yen Tien Giang Ninh Binh Nghe An Tra Vinh Tay Ninh Dien Bien Ca Mau Gia Lai Quang Ngai Thai Nguyen Phu Yen Cao Bang Lao Cai Ha Nam Yen Bai Binh Phuoc Ha Giang Dak Nong Health Education Infrastructure Law and Order

41 Provincial Performance in Public Service Delivery by Quartiles Best performers: Da Nang, Hai Phong, Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Quang Binh, Ho Chi Minh City, Long An, Hanoi, Quang Tri, Lang Son, Hai Duong, Binh Dinh, Vinh Long, Kien Giang, Thua Thien-Hue, Ben Tre and Vinh Phuc Poor performers: Tra Vinh, Tay Ninh, Dien Bien, Ca Mau, Gia Lai, Quang Ngai, Thai Nguyen, Phu Yen, Cao Bang, Lao Cai, Ha Nam, Yen Bai, Binh Phuoc, Ha Giang and Dak Nong

42 Citizens' Assessment of District Public Hospitals (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Cao Bang TT-Hue Soc Trang Binh Phuoc Ha Giang Dak Nong Hung Yen Quang Ninh Dong Nai Dak Lak Thai Nguyen Tay Ninh Khanh Hoa Dien Bien Bac Giang Nam Dinh Binh Thuan Phu Tho Hai Phong Dong Thap Lam Dong Binh Duong Long An Ninh Thuan Phu Yen Ha Nam Da Nang Thanh Hoa Nghe An Ninh Binh An Giang Tien Giang Gia Lai Vinh Phuc Hau Giang Bac Ninh Lang Son Ha Noi Bac Lieu Hoa Binh Hai Duong Quang Binh Tuyen Quang Quang Nam Kien Giang Ben Tre Thai Binh Lai Chau Binh Dinh Quang Tri BRVT HCMC Yen Bai Can Tho Vinh Long Ha Tinh Bac Kan Lao Cai Kon Tum Ca Mau Tra Vinh Quang Ngai Son La Perfect No Shared beds Electric fan Clean restroom Regular visits by staff Treated with respect Reasonable expenses Reasonable waiting period Disease/Injury cured Private Pharma Satisfaction with service Provinces have different problems with district hospitals quality. Poorer provinces (e.g. Son La, Quang Ngai, Tra Vinh, Ca Mau and Kon Tum) tend to receive higher scores in total quality of district hospital. Can Tho and HCMC are among the top 15 while Hai Phong at the bottom 15, and Ha Noi and Da Nang in the low average group. The most complained aspects are with patients sharing beds at district hospitals and long waiting period.

43 Citizens' Assessment of Public Primary Schools (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Dien Bien Lai Chau Ninh Thuan Cao Bang Khanh Hoa Bac Ninh Hai Phong Dak Lak Bac Giang Dong Nai Thai Nguyen Lao Cai Tra Vinh Ca Mau Bac Kan Phu Tho Ben Tre Tuyen Quang Ha Giang TT-Hue Hau Giang Ha Noi Ha Nam Binh Duong Quang Tri Quang Nam Hoa Binh Binh Thuan Son La Hai Duong Lam Dong Soc Trang Quang Ninh Tien Giang Thanh Hoa Kien Giang Hung Yen Lang Son Phu Yen Vinh Long Kon Tum Vinh Phuc Can Tho Ninh Binh An Giang Dak Nong Gia Lai Binh Dinh Nghe An HCMC Binh Phuoc BRVT Long An Nam Dinh Tay Ninh Dong Thap Da Nang Bac Lieu Quang Ngai Thai Binh Yen Bai Quang Binh Ha Tinh Perfect Brick Walls Clean Toilets Free Drinking Water Less than 36 students Less than 3 shifts No favoritism from teachers Well qualified teachers Regular feedback Informed of school revenue Provinces have different problems with public primary schools. Top 10 provinces are from different economic development backgrounds (e.g. Da Nang, Ha Tinh, Thai Binh and Yen Bai). The most complained aspects are with lack of fresh drinking water for school children, crowded classes, teachers biased towards school children taking extra classes, lack of transparency in school revenue towards parents.

44 Respondents who were victims of a type of crimes Vehicle Theft Break-In Robbery Physical Violence Lao Cai Son La Bac Giang Hoa Binh Ha Noi Dien Bien Hau Giang Thua Thien-Hue Tay Ninh Long An Cao Bang Lang Son Tien Giang Ha Tinh Hai Phong Quang Ngai Binh Dinh Tra Vinh Phu Tho Bac Lieu Binh Duong Ben Tre Dong Thap An Giang Quang Nam Ca Mau Vinh Long Ninh Thuan Can Tho Nghe An Dak Lak Nam Dinh Quang Ninh Gia Lai Ha Nam Tuyen Quang Quang Tri Lai Chau Binh Phuoc Kien Giang Ha Giang Soc Trang Quang Binh Dak Nong Khanh Hoa Thanh Hoa Vinh Phuc Ninh Binh Thai Binh Phu Yen Hung Yen Lam Dong HCMC Yen Bai Kon Tum Hai Duong Bac Kan Ba Ria-Vung Tau Thai Nguyen Dong Nai Bac Ninh Da Nang Binh Thuan

45 Correlation between PAPI 2011 and Other Parameters

46 PAPI 2011 vs. PCI 2011 PAPI2011 is correlated with PCI2011 (r=0.2330*). There are clear differences between citizens and businesses assessments Ha Nam Cao Bang Lam Dong Lang Son La Son Nam Dinh Thai Thai Nguyen Nghe An Vinh BinhLong Gia Lai Bac DakNong Kan Tuyen Quang DakLak Phu Yen Hoa Binh Quang Binh Binh Dinh Ha Noi Ben Tre Can Tho Quang Nam Binh Duong BR Vung Tau Da Nang Dong Thap Hai Phong Ca Mau Thua Thien-Hue Yen Bai Binh Phuoc Vinh Phuc Dong Nai Kon Tum Khanh Hoa Kien Giang Bac Giang Soc Trang Quang Ninh Phu Tho Ninh Thuan Bac Lieu An Giang Bac Ninh Hau Giang Quang Ngai Dien Bien Lai Chau Ninh Binh Hung Yen Binh Thuan Tra Vinh Ha Giang Hai Duong Tien Giang Thanh Hoa Tay Ninh TP.HCM Quang Tri Provincial Competitiveness Index, PCI 2011 Ha Tinh Long An 95% CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 Lao Cai r=.23*

47 PAPI weighted, 2011 PAPI 2011 vs. GDP2010 The correlation between PAPI2011 and GDP2010 is strong and positive with statistic significance at 0.05% (r=0.3150**). Richer provinces do not necessarily do better than poorer ones. Being wealthy is not an advantage to higher levels of governance and public administration performance Bac Kan Lai Chau Dien Bien Cao Bang Kon Tum Ha Giang Quang BinhHa Tinh Lang Son Son La Quang Tri Hoa Binh Yen Bai Tuyen Lao Cai Quang DakNong Ninh Thuan Ha Nam Hau Giang Phu Yen Ben Tre Binh Dinh Nam Dinh Da Nang Quang Nam Binh Duong Dong Hai Thap Duong Tien Giang Thanh Hoa Can Tho Thai Nguyen Nghe An Vinh Gia Lai Long Thai Binh Hai Phong Thua Ca Thien-Hue Mau Binh Phuoc DakLak Vinh Phuc Khanh Hoa Dong Nai Bac Giang Soc Trang Kien Giang Quang Ninh Phu Tho Bac Ninh Bac Lieu An Giang Quang Ngai Ninh Binh Hung Yen Binh Lam Thuan Dong Tra Vinh Long An Tay Ninh BR Vung Tau GDP 2010 at current prices (log10) 95% CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 Ha Noi r=.31** TP.HCM

48 PAPI weighted, 2011 PAPI 2011 vs.human Development Index (HDI) 2008 Governance and Public Administration very strongly associated with overall Human Development Index (0.3723***). Provinces with higher levels of performance in PAPI also tend to have higher human development levels (or vice versa) Lai Chau Ha Giang Dien Bien Son La Yen Bai Lao Cai Kon Tum Ninh Thuan Gia Lai Bac Kan Cao Bang Tra Vinh Quang BinhHa Tinh Lang Son Quang Tri Long An Binh Dinh Nam Dinh Ben Tre Quang Nam Hoa Binh Binh Duong Dong Thap Tien Hai Giang Duong Thanh Hoa Can Tho Nghe An Thai Nguyen Thai Binh Vinh LongHai Phong Thua Thien-Hue Ca Mau Tuyen Quang DakNong DakLak Binh Phuoc Vinh Phuc Khanh Dong Hoa Nai Soc Bac Trang Giang Kien Giang Quang Ninh Phu Tho An Giang Bac Ninh Ha Nam Bac Lieu Quang Ngai Hau Giang Phu Yen Ninh Binh Hung Yen Binh Thuan Lam Dong Tay Ninh TP.HCM Da Nang Ha Noi Human Development Index, HDI % CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 r=.37*** BR Vung Tau

49 Policy Implications of PAPI 2011

50 Some Policy Implications from PAPI 2011 PAPI is not just a single index, but an array of indicators assessing various key aspects of governance and public administration. Annually implementation from 2011 onwards allows to chart trends both at national and provincial levels Province to province comparison reveals relative strengths and weaknesses which may shift over time requiring policy makers attention to be adjusted Over time PAPI allows to evaluate results and impacts of reform efforts at both central and local level

51 Thank you for your attention! Citation: CECODES, FR, CPP & UNDP (2012). The Viet Nam Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI): Measuring Citizens Experiences. A Joint Policy Research Paper by Centre for Community Support and Development Studies (CECODES), The Front Review of the Central Committee for the Viet Nam Fatherland Front (FR), Commission on People s Petitions of the Standing Committee for the National Assembly of Viet Nam (CPP), and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Ha Noi, Viet Nam.