The Viet Nam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI) 2011 Measuring Citizens Experiences, May 03, 2012 Introduction of PAPI and National Trends in 2011 Contents What is PAPI? What does PAPI measure? Who implements PAPI? Some Initial Impacts of PAPI Changes in Methodology in PAPI 2011 Key Demographic Description of PAPI 2011 Sample An Overview of National Trends Observed in PAPI 2011 1
Introduction to PAPI What is PAPI? 2
Composition of PAPI 2011 Some Initial Impacts of PAPI Provincial Increasing evidence of provinces discussing PAPI findings and ways to improve performance (e.g. Ha Tinh,, HCMC and ). s action plan to improve performance National Viet Nam National HDR 2010 on social services Indicators used in Government Inspectorate (GI) Report to the Standing Committee of the National Assembly & in M&E indicator system on Anti- Corruption under construction PAPI data used to identify its usefulness for monitoring the implementation of the National Strategy on Gender Equality PAPI as output and means of verification of governance - One UN Plan 2012-2016 International PAPI s framework, methodology and philosophy highlighted as a international example in several international discussions (Beijing, Nepal, Tunisia, ASEAN + ROK, and Indonesia) and in the governance assessment portal (GAP) 3
Key Changes from PAPI 2010 Expansion of PAPI to cover all 63 provinces presented a unique opportunity to incorporate key lessons learned. Attending reflections from the National Advisory Board members to improve PAPI a number of changes were introduced: Significant changes in sampling strategy Three groups of provinces Improvements to reliability and validity Changes to questions and indicators Addition of one new sub-dimension Sub-dimension 5.4. on Other administrative procedures benchmark 2011 as the baseline year (PAPI 2011 data to be used as baselines for comparisons in the succeeding PAPI to show trends) An Overview of National Trends Observed in PAPI 2011 4
Current Household Economic Situation Awareness of Grassroots Democracy 5
Awareness of Land Use Plans At Local Levels Opportunities to Comment on Land Use Plans 6
Awareness of Poor Household Lists Corruption and Bribery in Public Sector 7
Nepotism in State Employment People-Elected Monitoring Institutions People s Inspection Boards Community Investment Supervision Boards 8
Citizen s Satisfaction Levels with Selected Administrative Procedures Citizen s Satisfaction Levels Public Hospital Services 9
Citizen s Satisfaction Levels with Education Services Aggregated PAPI 2011 and Provincial Performance Contents How is PAPI 2011 Constructed and Aggregated? Provincial Performance in PAPI 2011 by 6 Dimensions Correlation between PAPI 2011 and other Parameters Policy Implications of PAPI 2011 10
How is PAPI 2011 Constructed and Aggregated? How PAPI is constructed Collection Construction Calibration Indicator 1 Indicator n Indicator 1 Indicator n Indicator 1 Indicator n Indicators are derived from PAPI Survey of individuals in 63 provinces Indicator 1 Indicator n Indicator 1 Indicator n Dimension 1 Sub-dimension 1 Sub-dimension 2 Sub-dimension n Dimension n Sub-dimension 1 Sub-dimension n Weight s Weight s PAPI Source: CECODES, VFF and UNDP (2011). The Viet Nam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI): Measuring citizens experiences. Hanoi 11
Example of Control of Corruption (Dimension 4) Construction Dimension 4: Control of Corruption Sub-dimension 1: Public Officials Sub-dimension 2: Public Services Sub-dimension 3: Employment Equity in State Agencies Sub-dimension 4: Willingness to Fight Corruption Diversion of State Funds Bribe at Notary Bribe at Hospital Bribe to Teachers Bribe for Employment Nepotism for Employment Serious about Corruption Fight Denunciation Used Bribe for Construction Permits Bribe for LURCs Extra Educational Funds Source: CECODES, VFF and UNDP (2011). The Viet Nam Provincial Governance and Public Administration Performance Index (PAPI): Measuring citizens experiences. Hanoi 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 12
Control Panel of Provincial Performance by Dimensions Aggregate Un-weighted PAPI 2011 13
Quang Binh BRVT Long An Ha Tinh Son La Lang Son Tien Giang Hai Duong HCMC Nghe An Thai Binh Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Ha Nam Yen Bai Dak Nong Vinh Long Dak Lak Bac Giang Ca Mau TT-Hue Hai Phong Khanh Hoa Kien Giang Soc Trang Ninh Thuan Bac Lieu 27/04/2012 Unweighted PAPI (with 95% CI) 43.0 42.0 41.0 40.0 39.0 38.0 37.0 75 th percentile 36.0 35.0 25 percentile 34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 Mapping of Provincial Performance by PAPI 2011 Best performers: Quang Binh, Ba Ria Vung Tau, Long An,, Ha Tinh, Son La,, Lang Son, Binh Dinh,, Tien Giang,, Hai Duong, Da Nang, and Poor performers: Ninh Thuan,,, Hau Giang,,, Bac Lieu,, Binh Thuan,,,,, and. 14
BRVT Long An Quang Binh Ha Tinh Lang Son Son La HCMC Hai Duong Tien Giang Hai Phong Thai Binh Nghe An Vinh Long Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Dak Lak TT-Hue Ca Mau Khanh Hoa Soc Trang Kien Giang Bac Giang Yen Bai Ha Nam Bac Lieu Ninh Thuan Dak Nong 27/04/2012 Aggregate Weighted PAPI 2011 Weighted PAPI (with 95% CI) 45.0 44.0 43.0 42.0 41.0 40.0 39.0 38.0 37.0 36.0 75 th percentile 25 percentile 35.0 34.0 33.0 32.0 31.0 30.0 15
Provincial Performance by Dimensions Participation at the Local Level (Dimension 1) Son La Quang Binh Lang Son Ba Ria Vung Tau Long An Tien Giang Dak Nong Hai Duong Ha Tinh Bac Giang Gia Lai Nghe An Khanh Hoa Ha Nam Thai Binh Thai Nguyen Thua Thien Hue Vinh Long Hai Phong Yen Bai TP. Ho Chi Minh Dak Lak Kien Giang Ninh Thuan Soc Trang Ca Mau Bac Lieu Civic Knowledge Opportunities for Participation Quality of Elections Contributions 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 16
Son La Quang Binh Lang Son BRVT Long An Tien Giang Dak Nong Hai Duong Ha Tinh Bac Giang Gia Lai Nghe An Khanh Hoa Ha Nam Thai Binh Thai Nguyen TT-Hue Vinh Long Hai Phong Yen Bai HCMC Dak Lak Kien Giang Ninh Thuan Soc Trang Ca Mau Bac Lieu 27/04/2012 Participation at the Local Levels (with 95% Cis) 7.500 7.250 7.000 6.750 6.500 6.250 6.000 5.750 5.500 5.250 5.000 4.750 4.500 4.250 4.000 3.750 3.500 3.250 3.000 Provincial Performance in Participation at Local Levels by Quartiles Best performers: Son La, Quang Binh,, Lang Son, Ba Ria-Vung Tau,, Binh Dinh,,, Long An,, Tien Giang, Dak Nong,, Hai Duong and Poor performers:, Ninh Thuan,, Hau Giang, Soc Trang,,,,, Ca Mau,,, Bac Lieu, and 17
Grassroots Democracy Slogan.4.6.8 1 27/04/2012 Correlation in Knowledge of Grassroots Democracy Ordinance and of People Know, People Discuss, People Do and People Verify Slogan Quang Binh TT-Hue Ca Mau Hai Phong Ha Nam Hai Duong Dak Nong Lang Son Thai Binh Nghe An Thai Nguyen Ha Tinh Yen Bai Dak Lak Son La Bac Giang BRVT Thuan Ngai HCMC Khanh Hoa Gia Lai Long An Tien Giang Vinh Long Bac Lieu Kien Giang Soc Trang.2.3.4.5.6 (mean) Grassroots Democracy Ordinance 95% CI Fitted values (mean) PeopleKnow Transparency (Dimension 2) Ba Ria Vung Tau Ha Tinh Son La Lang Son Quang Binh Long An Yen Bai TP. Ho Chi Minh Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Nghe An Hai Duong Dak Nong Tien Giang Thai Binh Dak Lak Ha Nam Khanh Hoa Bac Giang Ca Mau Thua Thien Hue Hai Phong Vinh Long Soc Trang Kien Giang Bac Lieu Ninh Thuan Poverty Lists Communal Budgets Land-Use Plan/Pricing 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 18
BRVT Ha Tinh Son La Lang Son Quang Binh Long An Yen Bai HCMC Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Nghe An Hai Duong Dak Nong Tien Giang Thai Binh Dak Lak Ha Nam Khanh Hoa Bac Giang Ca Mau TT-Hue Hai Phong Vinh Long Soc Trang Kien Giang Bac Lieu Ninh Thuan 27/04/2012 Vertical Accountability (with 95% CIs) 7.250 7.000 6.750 6.500 6.250 6.000 5.750 5.500 5.250 5.000 4.750 4.500 4.250 4.000 Provincial Performance in Transparency by Quartiles Best performers: Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Ha Tinh,, Son La, Lang Son, Quang Binh, Long An, Quang Tri, Yen Bai,, Ho Chi Minh City, Gia Lai,, Hoa Binh, and Thai Nguyen Poor performers:, Lam Dong,, Ninh Thuan, Bac Lieu, Kien Giang,, Ha Giang,, Soc Trang, An Giang,,, Hung Yen and Vinh Long 19
Quang Binh Ha Tinh Thai Binh Nghe An Hai Duong Long An Ha Nam Lang Son Son La Tien Giang Yen Bai Dak Nong Thai Nguyen Dak Lak BRVT Ninh Thuan Bac Giang Gia Lai Vinh Long TT-Hue Kien Giang Khanh Hoa HCMC Ca Mau Soc Trang Bac Lieu Hai Phong 27/04/2012 Vertical Accountability (Dimension 3) Quang Binh Ha Tinh Thai Binh Nghe An Hai Duong Long An Ha Nam Lang Son Son La Tien Giang Yen Bai Dak Nong Thai Nguyen Dak Lak Ba Ria Vung Tau Ninh Thuan Bac Giang Gia Lai Vinh Long Thua Thien Hue Kien Giang Khanh Hoa TP. Ho Chi Minh Ca Mau Soc Trang Bac Lieu Hai Phong Interactions With Local Authorities People's Inspection Boards Community Investment Boards 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Vertical Accountability (with 95% CIs) 7.500 7.250 7.000 6.750 6.500 6.250 6.000 5.750 5.500 5.250 5.000 4.750 4.500 20
Provincial Performance in Vertical Accountability by Quartiles Best performers:, Quang Binh, Ha Tinh, Thai Binh, Nghe An,, Hai Duong, Long An, Ha Nam,,, Quang Ninh,,, Phu Tho and Lang Son Poor performers:, Hai Phong,,, Lai Chau,, Ca Mau, Soc Trang,,, Ben Tre,,, Bac Lieu and Control of Corruption in the Public Sector (Dimension 4) Long An Ca Mau Soc Trang Tien Giang Ba Ria Vung Tau Lang Son TP. Ho Chi Minh Son La Bac Lieu Quang Binh Thai Nguyen Ha Tinh Vinh Long Gia Lai Yen Bai Kien Giang Nghe An Ha Nam Hai Duong Dak Nong Khanh Hoa Thai Binh Dak Lak Bac Giang Thua Thien Hue Ninh Thuan Hai Phong Limits on Public Sector Corruption Limits on Corruption in Service Delivery Equity in Employment Willingness to Fight Corruption 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 21
Long An Ca Mau Soc Trang Tien Giang BRVT Lang Son HCMC Son La Bac Lieu Quang Binh Thai Nguyen Ha Tinh Vinh Long Gia Lai Yen Bai Kien Giang Nghe An Ha Nam Hai Duong Dak Nong Khanh Hoa Thai Binh Dak Lak Bac Giang TT-Hue Ninh Thuan Hai Phong 27/04/2012 Control of Corruption (with 95% CIs) 7.500 7.250 7.000 6.750 6.500 6.250 6.000 5.750 5.500 5.250 5.000 4.750 4.500 4.250 4.000 Provincial Performance in Control of Corruption by Quartiles Best performers: Long An, Binh Duong, Ca Mau,, Dong Thap, Soc Trang, Tien Giang, Ba Ria-Vung Tau,, Ben Tre, Lang Son, Ho Chi Minh City, Son La, Bac Lieu,, Poor performers:, Dak Lak, Bac Giang,, Thua Thien-Hue,, Ninh Thuan,,, Bac Ninh,, Hai Phong, Tra Vinh,, 22
Types of Corruption Southern provinces seem to be better in mitigating corruption (Soc Trang, Tien Giang, BRVT, Long An, and Dong Thap). Three Municipalities with average performance -, HCMC and. Two large urban areas as bottom performers - and Hai Phong Bribes for jobs in the public sector seem to be prevalent across the country. Other types of corruption are of no less significance across the country if provincial star graphs are compared with the perfect one. Level of Nepotism at the Provincial Level Zero Bac Giang Son La Khanh Hoa Vinh Long Ninh Thuan Yen Bai Thai Binh Ha Tinh TT-Hue Dak Lak Hai Phong Hai Duong Land Registry Commune Justice Officer Policeman Teacher People's Committee Nghe An Dak Nong Ha Nam Gia Lai BRVT Lang Son Soc Trang HCMC Bac Lieu Quang Binh Thai Nguyen Kien Giang Ca Mau Long An 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. 23
Quang Binh BRVT Dak Nong Long An Ha Tinh Yen Bai Gia Lai HCMC Vinh Long Ninh Thuan Hai Phong Dak Lak Thai Nguyen Tien Giang Kien Giang Bac Lieu Ca Mau Bac Giang Nghe An Thai Binh Lang Son Ha Nam Son La TT-Hue Soc Trang Hai Duong Khanh Hoa 27/04/2012 Public Administrative Procedures (Dimension 5) Quang Binh Ba Ria Vung Tau Dak Nong Long An Ha Tinh Yen Bai Gia Lai TP. Ho Chi Minh Vinh Long Ninh Thuan Hai Phong Dak Lak Thai Nguyen Tien Giang Kien Giang Bac Lieu Ca Mau Bac Giang Nghe An Thai Binh Lang Son Ha Nam Son La Thua Thien Hue Soc Trang Hai Duong Khanh Hoa Certification Procedures Construction Permit Land Procedures Personal Procedures 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Public Administrative Procedures (with 95% CIs) 8.000 7.875 7.750 7.625 7.500 7.375 7.250 7.125 7.000 6.875 6.750 6.625 6.500 6.375 6.250 6.125 6.000 24
Provincial Performance in Public Administrative Procedures by Quartiles Best performers: Quang Binh, Ba Ria-Vung Tau,, Da Nang,,, Dak Nong,, Dong Thap, Long An,, Ha Tinh,,, and Poor performers:, Thua Thien-Hue,,,, Soc Trang, Hai Duong,,,,, Khanh Hoa,, and Assessment of Quality of Certification Services (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements; Perfect =100% agreement) Zero Hai Phong Khanh Hoa Ninh Thuan Nghe An Bac Giang Ca Mau Yen Bai Vinh Long Tien Giang HCMC Long An Gia Lai Bac Lieu Quang Binh Ha Nam Kien Giang Quang Thai Nguyen Dak Lak Nam Clear Information Fees Displayed Officials Competent Treated w/respect Paperwork Reasonable Clear Deadline Deadline Met Satisfied w/service TT-Hue Dak Nong Lang Son BRVT Soc Trang Small variance across 63 provinces in the quality of certification services. Son La Thai Binh Ha Tinh Hai Duong 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. 25
Assessment of Construction Permit Application Procedures (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements; Perfect =100% agreement) Zero Dak Nong Vinh Long Lang Son Ha Tinh Khanh Hoa Gia Lai Bac Giang Hai Phong Long An BRVT HCMC Yen Bai 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 perform poorly in all given criteria, Quang Binh and Nghe An do very well in all of the criteria. receives complaints from applicants about publicity of application fees, Lang Son about deadlines, about information clarity, deadlines and overall satisfaction, about paperwork, while HCMC, though among the best performers is still complained about information clarity. Assessment of LURCs Application Procedures (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Thai Nguyen Ha Tinh Gia Lai Dak Lak Nghe An Dak Nong Hai Phong Yen Bai Ha Nam Soc Trang Ninh Thuan Bac Giang Long An Quang Binh Vinh Long HCMC Lang Son Tien Giang 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 and. seems to perform well in LURCs since citizens are satisfied with all 8 total quality criteria. Ca Mau Hai Duong 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. 26
Assessment of Commune-level Administrative Procedures (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Khanh Hoa Ha Nam Yen Bai Bac Giang Hai Phong Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Ninh Thuan Thai Binh Nghe An Lang Son TT-Hue Ca Mau Dak Lak Kien Giang Bac Lieu Son La Vinh Long Dak Nong HCMC Tien Giang Ha Tinh Long An Soc Trang 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 () is most striking in all 8 criteria. Public Services Delivery (Dimension 6) Hai Phong Ba Ria Vung Tau Quang Binh TP. Ho Chi Minh Long An Lang Son Hai Duong Vinh Long Kien Giang Thua Thien Hue Ninh Thuan Ha Tinh Son La Bac Lieu Khanh Hoa Soc Trang Thai Binh Dak Lak Bac Giang Tien Giang Nghe An Ca Mau Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Ha Nam Yen Bai Dak Nong Health Education Infrastructure Law and Order 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 27
Hai Phong BRVT Quang Binh HCMC Long An Lang Son Hai Duong Vinh Long Kien Giang TT-Hue Ninh Thuan Ha Tinh Son La Bac Lieu Khanh Hoa Soc Trang Thai Binh Dak Lak Bac Giang Tien Giang Nghe An Ca Mau Gia Lai Thai Nguyen Ha Nam Yen Bai Dak Nong 27/04/2012 Public Service Delivery (with 95% CIs) 8.00 7.75 7.50 7.25 7.00 6.75 6.50 6.25 6.00 5.75 5.50 5.25 5.00 Provincial Performance in Public Service Delivery by Quartiles Best performers:, Hai Phong, Ba Ria-Vung Tau, Quang Binh, Ho Chi Minh City, Long An, Hanoi,, Lang Son, Hai Duong, Binh Dinh, Vinh Long, Kien Giang, Thua Thien-Hue, and Poor performers:, Tay Ninh,, Ca Mau, Gia Lai,, Thai Nguyen,,,, Ha Nam, Yen Bai,, and Dak Nong 28
Citizens' Assessment of District Public Hospitals (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero TT-Hue Soc Trang Dak Nong Dong Dak Lak Thai Nguyen Khanh Hoa Bac Giang Nai Hai Phong Long An Ninh Thuan Ha Nam Nghe An Tien Giang Gia Lai Lang Son Bac Lieu Hai Duong Quang Binh Kien Giang Thai Binh BRVT HCMC Yen Bai Vinh Long Ha Tinh Ca Mau 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,,, Ca Mau and ) tend to receive higher scores in total quality of district hospital. and HCMC are among the top 15 while Hai Phong at the bottom 15, and and in the low average group. The most complained aspects are with patients sharing beds at district hospitals and long waiting period. Citizens' Assessment of Public Primary Schools (Branch Size= % of respondents agreeing to the statements in the legend; Perfect =100%) Zero Ninh Thuan Khanh Hoa Hai Phong Dak Lak Bac Giang Thai Nguyen Ca Mau TT-Hue Ha Nam Son La Hai Duong Soc Trang Tien Giang Kien Giang Lang Son Vinh Long Dak Nong Gia Lai Nghe An HCMC BRVT Long An Bac Lieu 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., 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. 29
Respondents who were victims of a type of crimes Vehicle Theft Break-In Robbery Physical Violence Son La Bac Giang Thua Thien-Hue Long An Lang Son Tien Giang Ha Tinh Hai Phong Bac Lieu Ca Mau Vinh Long Ninh Thuan Nghe An Dak Lak Gia Lai Ha Nam Kien Giang Soc Trang Quang Binh Dak Nong Khanh Hoa Thai Binh HCMC Yen Bai Hai Duong 0 20 40 60 Ba Ria-Vung Tau Thai Nguyen 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 0 20 40 60 Correlation between PAPI 2011 and Other Parameters 30
PAPI weighted, 2011 27/04/2012 PAPI 2011 vs. PCI 2011 PAPI2011 is correlated with PCI2011 (r=0.2330*). There are clear differences between citizens and businesses assessments 34 36 38 40 42 Ha Nam Lang Son La Son Thai Thai Nguyen Binh Nghe An Vinh Long Gia Lai DakNong DakLak Quang Binh BR Vung Tau Hai Phong Ca Mau Thua Thien-Hue Yen Bai Khanh Hoa Kien Giang Bac Giang Soc Trang Ninh Thuan Bac Lieu Hai Duong Tien Giang TP.HCM 50 55 60 65 70 75 Provincial Competitiveness Index, PCI 2011 Ha Tinh Long An 95% CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 r=.23* 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. 34 36 38 40 42 Quang BinhHa Tinh Lang Son Son La Yen Bai Tuyen Quang DakNong Ninh Thuan Ha Nam Dong Hai Thap Duong Tien Giang Thai Nguyen Nghe An Vinh Gia Lai Long Thai Binh Hai Phong Thua Ca Thien-Hue Mau DakLak Khanh Hoa Bac Giang Soc Trang Kien Giang Bac Lieu Binh Lam Thuan Dong Long An BR Vung Tau 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 GDP 2010 at current prices (log10) 95% CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 r=.31** TP.HCM 31
PAPI weighted, 2011 27/04/2012 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). 34 36 38 40 42 Yen Bai Son La Ninh Thuan Gia Lai Quang BinhHa Tinh Lang Son Tien Hai Giang Duong Nghe An Thai Nguyen Thai Binh Vinh LongHai Phong Thua Thien-Hue Ca Mau DakNong DakLak Khanh Dong Hoa Nai Soc Bac Trang Giang Kien Giang Ha Nam Bac Lieu Long An TP.HCM r=.37***.55.6.65.7.75.8 Human Development Index, HDI 2008 BR Vung Tau 95% CI Fitted values PAPI weighted, 2011 Policy Implications of PAPI 2011 32
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 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)., Viet Nam. 33