The rapid urbanisation of Dhaka has brought opportunities as well as challenges. To formulate any effective interventions to tackle those challenges, the urban governance of Dhaka first needs to be understood in its current form. In our first annual flagship report of its kind, the “State of Cities 2012: Urban Governance in Dhaka,” we provided a comprehensive assessment of the historical, political, economic, and social dynamics which shape various spheres of urban life and governance in Dhaka. We have found Dhaka’s urban governance to be both complex and vibrant with various challenges to overcome.
Researchers: Ipshita Basu; Kazi Nurmohammed Hossainul Haque; Rigan Chakma; Rubayet Hamid; Thomas Oldham; Mohammad Sirajul Islam; Md. Harun-Or-Rashid; Mahboob Elahi Akhter; Elvira Graner; Syeda Salina Aziz; Jannatul Fardosh; Mariha Khalid
Partners: International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
Timeline: 2011-2012
Status: Completed
Contact: Mohammad Sirajul Islam; sirajul@bracu.ac.bd
Publications:
Context
Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh, is one of the largest and most densely populated cities in the world. Due to rapid urbanisation, Dhaka has become the country’s prime hub of economic, social, and cultural activities. This fleeting burst of urbanisation requires good urban governance to maintain sustainability, equity, efficiency, transparency, accountability, security, and civic engagement. Existing studies on Dhaka’s urban governance almost exclusively focus on the city’s dilemmas and deficiencies while ignoring its myriad characteristics. These studies determine indicators of success and shape agendas for urban governance reform based on the characteristics of cities in developed countries. But in a developing country like Bangladesh, these principles are often inapplicable. To find more inductive and empirically grounded ways of forming good urban governance, we need to analyse the urban governance of Dhaka by taking its distinct and complex characteristics into account.
Objectives
Our objective of this study was to understand how governance actually operates in particular arenas of Dhaka through a variety of relationships, institutional spaces, incentives, and interests. We aimed to describe rather than prescribe Dhaka’s urban governance by looking at it from three perspectives: the relationship between formal and informal governance structures, the interplay between governance structures and governance agencies, and the forms and functions of urban institutions.
This study is relevant to SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), partocularly to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
Methodology
For this study, we interviewed the key stakeholders who have influence over specific dimensions of urban life, such as ward elections, rickshaw trade, distribution of services in the informal settlements, etc. We also commissioned a city-wide survey using citizen report cards (CRC) to collect individual household’s assessment of the quality of services delivered to them.
Findings and Recommendations
From our findings, it was evident that the ruling government parties are strongly inclined to control local administrative structures. It allows them to influence development decisions and resources in their favour. There is also a tendency among them to postpone local elections so that even in the lower reaches of government, power is not dispensed to the opposition parties. We also found that citizenship within the city is determined based on a hierarchy. Citizens with no land, for example, including the vast population of rural migrants, do not get to participate in local elections. Furthermore, the accountability mechanism through which citizens hold services providers accountable for their services is very weak. Slum-dwellers have to enter into contracts with local intermediaries to access public services. Such intermediaries leave very little choice and even lesser space for slum-dwellers to voice their concerns over the price and quality of the services. They step in to provide public services and employment opportunities wherever welfare provision from the formal state is weak or insufficient.
This system of patronage proves how governance in the city actually works through personalised channels. Though such channels produce positive results in a short-term, in the long-run they are more harmful than good. Citizens’ ability to hold their local elected institutions accountable in providing adequate services, therefore, should be strengthened. Empowering representative local bodies through regular and inclusive electoral practices can also enhance accountability mechanisms within the existing patronage relations at the local level.
