Urban Indicators and Performance
Measurement Program

Moreover, there is little appreciation of what their own remedial programs and policies are achieving. The decision makers generally rely on disaggregated raw data that are of little value in devising policy. Even though statistics may be based on data that have been verified, classified and adjusted, their relationship to policy outcomes may still be difficult to understand and apply.

Existing tools for urban policy in both developing are largely inadequate in providing an overall picture of the city and how it works. In order to devise effective policies, the decision makers need to rely on a set of measures that point to specific urban phenomena such as service levels, access to services (service coverage), efficiency in service provision, and financial performance with respect to revenue sources, efficiency in resource mobilization and utilization, etc. How we anticipate, recognize, measure and interpret urban problems and how we respond to them in policy will determine the overall sustainability of human development.

There is a need of some standard to provide an overall picture of the city and how it works. Such measures could be in the form of Urban Indicators, which are variables or functions of several variables that measure particular real world phenomena over time. Indicators can assist in analyzing trends and impacts of policies. They are powerful tools for clarifying values and informing decisions with regard to development planning.

An Urban Indicator (UI) is a measure that summarises information about a particular subject. It provides a reasonable response to specific needs and questions asked by decision and policy makers. UI provides an objective description of the conditions of the urban area as they relate to the goals of the community. Indicators reflect the trend of development and also provide quantitative and qualitative information.

Performance measurement could be defined as 'evaluation of policy through a well defined set of indicators termed as performance indicators'. These indicators would measure the performance of a municipal body, which are benchmarked against set targets. Performance can be measured over a period of time or it can be a comparative performance measurement, which may be either absolute (comparison with standards) or relative (comparing within the ULBs).

Over the last decade, several major developments have enhanced the role and functions of local governments in urban development. The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act has both given a constitutional status to urban municipalities and enhanced their functions. At the same time, over this period, the municipalities also have an increased access to institutional finance. As per recent trends, possibilities of direct access to capital market through a municipal bond system has also emerged.

Further, the functional domain of local authorities determines the type of services they have to provide to the inhabitants of the city/town. Civic services such as water supply, sewerage and sanitation, solid waste management, roads, storm water drains, streetlights and slum development, etc., are obligatory services of the local body. With increasing emphasis on local level financial viability and the gradual entry of the private sector in providing local services, the issues of efficiency in service provision becomes crucial - more so with regards to costs of provision of services and efficiency in terms of utilization of manpower.

It is in this context of increasing independence as well as powers to the urban local bodies, and in a world where "information is power", that CMAG has started this program of Urban Indicators and Performance Measurement. The project aims at providing policy makers/implementation agencies with an analytical tool, which would enable more informed planning and decision-making. Performance assessment will be useful for a number of different stakeholders in urban development. Such an exercise would be beneficial to municipalities as well as state level monitoring and regulatory agencies. In addition, other actors such as finance institutions, investors, credit rating agencies would also benefit from reliable comparative information on the performance of municipalities. Over time, such a system would help to develop sector norms or benchmarks, which at present, simply do not exist for urban development agencies and services. Such an exercise can help to improve performance and accountability of local governments by providing useful benchmarks for services and financial performance.

The program is supported by International City/County Management Association (ICMA), Washington DC under the USAID Contract.

CMAG has formed a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprising experts form ICMA, USAID, FIRE(D), Academic Institutions, State Government bodies and Class I Municipal Officials.