North-East Provincial Council

Centre for International Migration and Development

Institutional Analysis

DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
IN NORTH-EAST PROVINCE

Claus Kruse
Christoph Woiwode
Provincial Planning Secretariat - NEPC
Centre for International Migration and Development

Trincomalee/Colombo, November 2006

b
 CONTENTS

Abbreviations ……………………………………………………………………………..……….... iii

Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………………….… v
1 Introduction ………………………………..…………………………………….……...…….... 1
2 Approach to institutional analysis ……………………………………….…………………..... 5
2.1 Institutions and organisations in development ……………………………………………... 5
2.2 The ‘web’ of institutionalisation: a tool for diagnosis and intervention …………………… 5
2.3 Observations on North-East Province ……………………………………………………… 7
2.4 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 8
3 Background information: North-East Province ……………………………………………… 9
4 Legal framework and planning regulations ………………………………………………….. 11
4.1 The laws ……………………………………………………………………………………. 11
4.2 Other regulations and guidelines ………………………………………………………….... 16
4.3 Sample of existing (integral) development plans …………………………………………... 18
4.4 Conclusions ……………………………………………………………………………….... 20
5 Institutional environment ……………………………………………………………………… 23
5.1 General set-up ………………………………………………………………………………. 23
5.2 Fiscal devolution …………………………………………………………………………… 27
5.2.1 Assessment, allocation and apportionment of provincial funds …………………… 27
5.2.2 Funding channels …………………………………………………………………... 29
5.2.3 Sources of self-generated provincial revenue ……………………………………... 31
5.2.4 Expenditure ………………………………………………………………………... 31
5.2.5 Observations on the progress of fiscal devolution ………………………………… 31
5.3 Main development agents at national level ………………………………………………… 32
5.4 Main development agents at provincial level ………………………………………………. 34
5.4.1 Provincial Government ………………………………………………………….…. 34
5.4.2 Branches of national ministries …………………………………………………….. 36
5.4.3 Selected donor-funded projects …………………………………………………….. 36
5.4.4 The LTTE and its Planning and Development Secretariat ………………………… 36
5.5 Provincial Planning Secretariat …………………………………………………………….. 37
5.5.1 Objectives and functions …………………………………………………………… 37
5.5.2 Organisational structure ……………………………………………………………. 39
5.5.3 Organisational environment ……………………………………………………….. 41
5.5.4 Other observations …………………………………………………………………. 44
5.5.5 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………… 44
5.6 Main development agents at district level ………………………………………………….. 44
5.6.1 District administration ……………………………………………………………… 44
5.6.2 Planning at district level ……………………………………………………………. 45
5.6.3 Selected donor-funded projects …………………………………………………….. 46
5.7 Main development agents at local level ……………………………………………………. 48
5.7.1 Administration at local level ……………………………………………………….. 48
5.7.2 Local Government finance ………………………………………………………… 49
5.7.3 Planning at divisional level ………………………………………………………… 50
5.7.4 Local Government in the planning system ………………………………………… 51
5.7.5 Other planning agents at local level ………………………………………………... 56
5.7.6 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………… 58
6 Organisational and human resources in physical planning ……………………………..…... 61
6.1 Educational institutions …………………………………………………………………….. 61
6.2 Town and country planning expertise ……………………………………………………… 63
6.3 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 63
7 Cross-cutting issue I: Disaster risk prevention and preparedness in development planning 65
7.1 Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………… 65

i
 7.2 Changing institutional arrangements ……………………………………………………….. 66
7.3 Disaster risk management legislation and policies …………………………………………. 69
7.4 Current activities in disaster risk management and the relevance for development planning 71
7.5 Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………… 72
8 Cross-cutting issue II: Conflict-sensitive planning …………………………………………… 73
8.1 Administration and ethnicity ……………………………………………………………….. 73
8.2 Land issues and the conflict ………………………………………………………………... 74
8.3 The tsunami-affected and war-affected population ………………………………………… 75
8.4 Current planning practice and the conflict …………………………………………………. 75
8.5 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………. 77
9 Proposed interventions …………………………………………………………………………. 79
9.1 Frame conditions: national level …………………………………………………………… 79
9.2 Institutional environment: NEPC …………………………………………………………... 79
9.3 Organisational level: Provincial Planning Secretariat ……………………………………… 81
9.3.1 Organisational structure ……………………………………………………………. 81
9.3.2 Individual skills …………………………………………………………………….. 83
9.3.3 Supplementary organisational analysis ……………………………………………... 84
9.4 Local level ………………………………………………………………………………….. 84
10 Consulted bibliography ……………………………………………………………………….. 87
11 Annexe …………………………………………………………………………………………. 89
Annexe 1: List of interviews conducted ………………………………………………………. 89
Annexe 2: Summary of provincial (i.e. devolved), reserved (i.e. Central Government) and
concurrent (i.e. joint) functions as stipulated in the Ninth Schedule to the 13th Amendment to
the Constitution (“List I”, “List II” and “List III”) …………………………………………….. 91

ii
 ABBREVIATIONS

ACLG Assistant Commissioner Local Government (see also R/ACLG)

ADB Asian Development Bank
CAARP Conflict-Affected Area Rehabilitation Project
CBO(s) Community-Based Organisation(s)
CDO Community Development Officer
CEA Central Environmental Authority
CIM Centre for International Migration and Development
CIRM Centre for Information Resource Management
CLG Commissioner Local Government
CWSSP Community Water Supply and Sanitation Programme
DCC District Coordinating Committee
DDC District Development Committee
DERBA Development and Rehabilitation of Batticaloa
DMC Disaster Management Centre
DPDHS Deputy Provincial Director Health Service
DS Divisional Secretariat / Divisional Secretary
GA Government Agent
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GN Grama Niladhari
GoSL Government of Sri Lanka
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (German Technical Cooperation)
IDNDR International Decade for Natural Disaster Risk Reduction
INGO(s) International non-governmental organisation(s)
ISDR International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction
ITDG Intermediate Technology Development Group
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
LG Local Government
LGA Local Government Assistant
LTTE Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam
MANRECAP Mannar District Rehabilitation and Reconstruction through Community Approach
MC Municipal Council
MIS Management Information System
MOH Medical Officer Health
MP(s) Member(s) of Parliament
NCDPM National Committee for Disaster Preparedness and Management
NDMC National Disaster Management Centre
NECCDEP North-East Coastal Community Development Programme
NECORD North-East Community Restoration and Development
NEERP North-East Emergency Reconstruction Programme
NEHRP North-East Housing Reconstruction Programme
NEIAP North-East Irrigated Agriculture Project
NEP North-East Province
NEPC North-East Provincial Council
NGO(s) Non-governmental organisation(s)
NHDA National Housing Development Authority
NPPD National Physical Planning Department
NWSDB National Water Supply and Drainage Board
OES Office Employee Service
PCC Provincial Coordinating Committee
PDS Planning and Development Secretariat (LTTE)
PPC Provincial Planning Committee

iii
PPS Provincial Planning Secretariat
PIP Performance Improvement Project
PS Pradeshiya Sabha
R/ACLG (Regional) Assistant Commissioner Local Government (see also ACLG)
RADA Reconstruction and Development Authority
RDS Rural Development Society
Rs (Sri Lanka) Rupees
STAART Sri Lanka Affected Areas Recovery and Take-off Project
TAARP Tsunami-Affected Area Rebuilding Project
TRINCAP Technical Cooperation Project for Agricultural and Rural Development for Rehabilitation
and Reconstruction through Community Approach in Trincomalee
UC Urban Council
UDA Urban Development Authority
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNP United National Party

iv
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The North-East Province was created along with the other provinces in Sri Lanka after the signing of the
Indo-Sri Lanka Accord of 1987. The province comprises eight districts (Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mullaitivu, Va-
vuniya, Mannar, Trincomalee, Batticaloa and Ampara) and covers an area of 18,880 km2, which represents
29% of the total area of the island. The population was estimated at 2.62 million inhabitants in 2003, or 15%
of the country’s total population. The Province is considered the poorest and least developed in Sri Lanka.

Today’s socio-political situation stems in part from the intricate Sri Lankan legal framework. The original
mixture of local, regional and European models that served to establish most laws and regulations has been
further complicated by successive regimes that introduced new laws and regulations, in many cases without
revoking previous ones, creating a vast number of contradictory norms and competing institutions. Develop-
ing planning and physical planning are no exceptions to this. The Constitution, various Acts and Ordinances,
and a great number of Circulars deal with the subject planning without giving clear mandates to the public
bodies involved. So for example, it is not clear which organisation is responsible for the formulation of pro-
vincial physical and development plans.

One of the main factors that lead to this situation is the “dual” system of government in the country, whereby
devolved government bodies (provincial and local councils) govern alongside de-concentrated central gov-
ernment bodies (central ministries in the provinces, district secretariats, divisional secretariats). The distribu-
tion of tasks between these bodies is based on the stipulations in the 13th Amendment to the Constitution.
However, the division of functions along three “lists” (reserved, provincial and concurrent) generates many
“grey areas” which the stronger organisation usually takes advantage of to encroach into the other’s area of
responsibility. In terms of fiscal devolution, the decentralisation process in the country has been somewhat
hindered. The powers to self-generate resources (e.g. tax collection) that have been devolved to provincial
and local governance bodies are not sufficient to carry out the functions allocated to them. The result is a
dependency on central government transfers and constant central interference in devolved subjects. This
complex set-up of the Sri Lankan State is explained in detail in Chapter 5.

In terms of roles and responsibilities in planning at national level, there are numerous ministries involved.
Too many ministries prepare plans that go beyond their subject and certainly beyond the appropriate level of
intervention. In terms of physical planning it is mainly two central agencies: National Physical Planning De-
partment and Urban Development Authority. However, in recent months the Ministry of Defence has been
involved in this field, encroaching into a traditionally civil subject. Provincial level planning is not clearly
allocated to a single organisation. The understanding is that the function is devolved to the provincial coun-
cils, but in view of the insufficient capacity to carry it out, national level (National Physical Planning De-
partment) prepares plans “on behalf of the provinces”. At district level there is no apparent regulation re-
garding physical or even development planning. In practice, the district secretariats prepare their annual
plans, which are mostly compilations of divisional plans.

Physical and development planning at local level suffer from similar problems. The Urban Development
Authority is mandated to plan the physical development of areas declared under its jurisdiction. Virtually, all
areas declared as “urban area” fall under this category. However, recent circulars have declared large rural
areas as areas to be planned under UDA law (e.g. the entire Trincomalee District). On the other hand, the
local governments (Pradeshiya Sabha, Urban Council, Municipal Council) have been charged [by law] with
the regulation, control and administration of all matters relating to public health, public utility services and
public thoroughfares and generally with the protection and promotion of the comfort, convenience and wel-
fare of the people and all amenities. It is unclear which of the organisations has power over final decisions.
In addition, the public body that formulates the most relevant development plans at local level is neither of
the two aforementioned: it is the divisional secretariat. The planning sections of the divisional secretariats
collect demands from the communities and compile them into annual development plans. These plans come
closest to proper development plans for the area of a division, which is in many cases equal to a Pradeshiya

v
Sabha. However, it rather complicates the situation at local level in terms of integrated development plan-
ning.

Owing to the existing administrative circumstances, the government-controlled line of command is the pre-
eminent planning authority at district and local level. This situation appears prevalent in most districts, and
usually these entities are viewed as the single actual planning actors, which automatically makes them poten-
tial partners for governmental and non-governmental development agencies. The Central Government ad-
ministrative structure has been able to dominate local planning.

As to the actual planning procedures and processes, we believe that the shortcomings and weaknesses of the
system are generally well known to most observers and stakeholders involved in it. The fundamental issues
from our point of view, however, may be summarised as follows:

Large number of administrative institutions operating at local level

Inadequate transparency and accountability characterises the planning process, whereby the main plan-
ning actors (division/district) have no people’s representation.
Poor coordination and communication and frequent unwillingness to collaborate due to asymmetrical
power relationships among stakeholders and even within departments
Sectoral rather than integrated thinking dominates current planning practice, in part due to the under-
standing of Local Government as a ‘sector’
Spatial/physical planning is conceptually and institutionally isolated from development (socio-economic)
planning and budget formulation
Planning administration across all institutions is largely suffering from insufficient human resources both
in terms of vacant positions and skilled professional staff
The sustainability of interventions of non-governmental organisations is jeopardised because they are not
based on proper local development plans, and because they take place largely uncoordinated

If spatialised development planning is to become a genuine part of the democratic local planning system in
the future, emphasis must be put on the local authorities. It is imperative to reduce the distance between the
two administrative structures at local level in order to improve the planning process and consequently to in-
crease the impact of development activities. While it is recognised that strengthening both Local Govern-
ments and Divisional Secretariats is required, the focus will have to be on the first to bridge the gap between
them.

Assuming that Central Government genuinely wishes to establish a devolved planning system, we could
conclude that it is the local government that has “the last word” regarding decision-making at local level.
Unfortunately, local government is not understood as “the government at local level”. Local government is
understood as one of the subjects devolved to the provinces, similar to cooperative development or rural
development. This understanding has further negative implications. Development planning as a task of the
local governments is dealt with in the Department of Local Government within one of the provincial minis-
tries. The link to the Planning Secretariat of the Provincial Council is weak.

The main function of the Provincial Planning Secretariat (PPS) is to establish a provincial planning system
in NEP. In reality, however, PPS is merely more than an administrator of funds that are channelled through
the NEPC. Development planning - understood in an integrated and strategic way - is not being carried out
amongst the development agents in NEP, including PPS. “Plans” are not documents based on situational
analysis and strategic prioritisation, but rather compilations of various activities. Inter-sectoral linkages are
not identified, regional potentials are not exploited and inner-provincial differences are not objectively
considered.

The fact that there is not a single, comprehensive and properly integrated (not just compiled) development
plan has as a consequence the existence and utilisation of uncoordinated plans. Sectoral plans are not
amended according to general provincial priorities; at most they are adjusted to budgetary ceilings and pri-
orities set in Colombo. Line ministries play a stronger role than what should be the case. Provincial minis-
tries often understand themselves as implementers of national policies, not at all as devolved and therefore
semi-autonomous ministries. District, divisional and Local Government plans follow their own prioritisation
and cannot be in line with provincial priorities because such priorities are not formulated in a comprehensive

vi
integral provincial development plan. Donor-funded projects are not coordinated because there is no provin-
cial formulated provincial vision to coordinate them with.

The need for PPS to prepare a provincial development plan, not an investment plan or a compilation of sec-
toral and sub-provincial plans, is of paramount importance. PPS is one of the key organisations of NEPC. It
is however not playing the important role it should be playing. There are both external and internal factors to
this. The image of PPS and the relationships with other organisations has to improve. Automation of infor-
mation flow, especially to PPS, has to be prioritised. The functions of PPS should be reviewed, as well as the
corresponding internal organisational arrangements (organisational structure). Staffing is an issue which
needs to be tackled. Key positions have to be filled.

Recruiting qualified staff to work in NEP is however a difficult task. The conflict makes it unattractive for
professionals to work in NEP. Singhalese professionals are reluctant to work in Tamil majority areas. But it
is also the limited possibilities offered by educational institutions that lead to insufficient professionals in the
field of development planning, especially in physical planning. The pool of professional planners who would
qualify to work in NEP is very limited.

In general, the situation of the NEP is particularly difficult and needs to be considered in its many dimen-
sions. Two additional aspects in this respect are disaster risk prevention and preparedness, and conflict sensi-
tivity.

Currently, disaster risk management is very much characterized by the dominance of national institutions.
Parallel institutional structures and fragmented responsibilities are the main issue. Even though the institu-
tional framework of disaster risk management is still quite young, there is already a need to create more
clarification. The lack of coordination is a major obstacle in current disaster management in Sri Lanka.
There are too many organisations without proper links, and numerous NGOs which have substantial
amounts of money to be spent but are not part of an overall strategy. Lack of training and education of offi-
cials and the public, resulting in poor awareness, and inadequate emphasis on disaster preparedness are yet
other reasons for the slow process of institutionalising a disaster risk management framework.

In theory, the turn towards a comprehensive disaster risk management framework that is integrated into de-
velopment planning has been executed. The legal framework and detailed activities to implement it are in
place. Now it depends on the medium and long-term willingness and commitment of politicians and admin-
istrators at both national as well as local level to put it into practice. Given the present conditions in the
North-East Province, disaster risk preparedness must be understood as a means of conflict and crisis preven-
tion in terms of resource allocation and participation of ethnic groups.

As for conflict-sensitive planning, it is crucial to understand that administrative and electoral adjustments
and rearrangements have contributed to increased segregation and separation of all the three communities –
Tamil, Muslim, Singhalese – in the NEP, especially in its Eastern parts. Till now no genuine reconciliation
effort has been made to ‘bridge’ the ethnic divides. However, at local level it might be unavoidable to create
a sense of ‘common fate’ that includes all three communities. It is for this reason that ‘planning’ and the al-
location of resources are seen as a zero-sum game in which the ‘others’ always win and one’s own people
are bound to lose.

A participatory and transparent planning process that attempts to include members of represented local eth-
nic groups can provide not only a common understanding on the use of limited resources, but has the poten-
tial of a conflict-sensitive and reconciliatory planning approach. From the point of view of the NEPC and
Provincial Planning Secretariat this means keeping in mind that the rationale of resource allocation should
incorporate not only ‘factual’ criteria but also equal distribution. This can only be achieved if the decision-
making process is kept as open and inclusive as possible.

After analysing all aspects mentioned above we can conclude that an intervention to improve (physical) de-
velopment planning in NEP needs to address issues at various levels. No intervention at provincial or local
level can guarantee its success unless some fundamental changes in the national frame take place. At provin-
cial level, NEPC has to strengthen the cooperation and coordination between its departments and with cen-
tral agencies as well as with the private sector. The Provincial Planning Secretariat itself needs to be over-

vii
hauled, its capacity increased. Finally, the situation at local level has to be tackled from two angles: the
strengthening of the local governments and the improvement of cooperation and coordination between these
and the divisional secretariats. Some recommendations on how and where to address some of the issues
mentioned here are treated more fully in the final chapter of this report.

viii
 1
INTRODUCTION

In early 2005, he Chief Secretary of North-East Province (NEP) requested technical assistance from the
German Centre for International Migration and Development (CIM) in the form of professional personnel to
strengthen the Provincial Planning Secretariat. By November that same year, two CIM-Experts joined the
Planning Secretariat and embarked on an in-depth institutional analysis of the development planning proc-
esses at all levels of the Sri Lankan public administration (national, provincial, district, local), with special
focus on the North-East Provincial Council (NEPC) and its Provincial Planning Secretariat (PPS). In addi-
tion, the CIM Experts are closely cooperating with the GTZ Performance Improvement Project (PIP), which
has defined the strengthening of the Provincial Planning Secretariat as one of its main objectives. In this con-
text, we would like to thank all our interview partners for the time they gave us (please see the annexe), and
especially Chief Secretary NEPC, Mr Rangarajah, Deputy Chief Secretary Planning, Mr Croos, Senior Ad-
visor GTZ PIP, Mr Keller, and our colleagues at Provincial Planning Secretariat for the support provided.

The objective of the analysis is to gain an adequate understanding of all aspects regarding development plan-
ning in Sri Lanka, which includes the set-up of the State and its administrative levels, the historical
background (especially in relation to the ethnic conflict), the main agents in development planning, the legal
framework, the planning processes both on paper and on the ground, and more specifically the functions and
organisational arrangements of the Provincial Planning Secretariat. This understanding will lead to the iden-
tification of gaps and weaknesses in, and obstacles to the proper functioning of the planning system in the
region, and the subsequent formulation of interventions.

The analysis – and therefore this report – is consciously biased towards physical planning (also called town
and country planning), as this was the original task for the experts recruited through CIM, as requested by
NEPC: to work on regional and local physical planning. This focus has apparently changed within NEPC
between the time of request to CIM and the time of arrival of the experts, although its importance remains
intact, as we will explain in the report.

The report tries to summarise all findings of the analysis and provides proposals which will be discussed,
amended and, it is hoped, later implemented by the CIM Experts, the staff at Provincial Planning Secretariat
and other development partners in NEP. We must say, however, that the report, which we are presenting as a
draft, will probably never cease to be a draft. The 23-year old and ongoing ethnic conflict, the ill-conceived
devolution process, the tsunami and the subsequent wave of international organisations, have all contributed
to such an impenetrable tangle of organisations and processes in the field of development planning that it is
our recommendation to take this report as a snapshot of the situation as we saw it from a specific angle and
at a specific time.

One knot we would like to untie from the start is the one caused by the many organisations that claim to be
carrying out planning or even development planning as one of their functions.

Definition of planning

It is imperative to define the concept of planning for the purpose of this report. Planning is a very broad term
that can be (and is) understood in endless different ways. To agree on an initial understanding we want to
define planning as the organisation of activities to achieve an objective. Taking this definition as a starting
point, we would like to summarise some of the most commonly used expressions regarding types of plan-
ning. The table below shows types of planning in a simplified manner, to make them accessible to the lay-
person.

1

Term
Development planning
Socio-economic planning
Strategic planning
Project planning
Physical planning (also: town
and country planning / spatial
planning / urban and regional
planning)
Town planning / urban plan-
ning
Urban development planning
Rural (development) plan-
ning
Sectoral planning
Environmental planning
Integral or integrated devel-
opment planning
Participatory planning
Investment planning
Provincial planning
Regional planning
District planning
Divisional planning
Local planning
2
Table 1
Types of planning
Remarks
Mostly referred to as a compilation of planned interventions of varied nature or type (e.g.
“hard” vs. “soft” projects) to be carried out in order to achieve development (“progress”)
Development planning “narrowed down” to socio-economic aspects.
This understanding very often leaves out physical aspects, therefore creating a gap be-
tween socio-economic targets, and availability of resources and physical conditionality
Often refers to an analytical process that leads to the “strategic” definition of interven-
tions, so as to focus on fewer (main) interventions to achieve maximum outputs. Espe-
cially relevant in the context of limited financial resources
Design stage of a project where the objective(s), activities, timeframe, milestones and
inputs (financial and human resources) are defined and arranged in a project cycle
Development planning with focus on physical expression of development activities (e.g.
use of land, location of infrastructures)
Planning of the physical development of an urban area (village, town, city). Its most
common form is land use planning (zoning), but it has subsequent levels, down to urban
design of neighbourhoods, where it collides with architecture
Development planning of an urban area which includes socio-economic and physical
aspects
Development planning with focus on rural areas (e.g. rural livelihoods, agricultural infra-
structure, accessibility to markets)
(Development) Planning in a specific field (sector), e.g. education, health, agriculture,
etc.
Planning that focuses on the possible implications of any kind of intervention in the envi-
ronment (in the broader sense). It is therefore cross-sectoral in its analysis and sector-
specific in its proposals
Comprehensive planning approach that links (“integrates”) social, economic and physical
planning
Mostly referred to a decision-making process where the beneficiaries are directly in-
volved
In an ideal case, investment planning should be a result of a development planning
process that includes a comprehensive analysis and concludes in project proposal / rec-
ommended interventions. It links development efforts with budgets
Planning for the entire provincial territory (jurisdiction of the provincial administration). It
could refer to any kind of planning (physical, socio-economic, sectoral).
In physical planning, it would refer to main provincial development patterns and objec-
tives, e.g. economical development corridors; hierarchies in the urban network for de-
centralised service provision (health, education, etc.); main road network; establishment
of protected areas; etc.
“Region” is a term used in many different ways. In the context of socio-economic devel-
opment planning and physical planning it would usually refer to an area characterised by
its inter-linkages, social and economic. E.g. the relevant “region” for Trincomalee Town
could be defined as the area where most of the agricultural produce available in the town
is produced (“hinterland”). Such an area would usually cut across administrative bounda-
ries of divisions and districts.
In Sri Lanka, however, the “region” has been defined “per circular” as equal to the prov-
ince
Planning for the entire district territory (jurisdiction of the district administration). It could
refer to any kind of planning (physical, socio-economic, sectoral).
In physical planning, it would refer to a more detailed development planning, specifying
the provisions of the provincial planning, but also developing own priorities to feed them
back into the provincial planning process.
In the Sri Lanka context it is understood as the coordination of all activities in the district
and especially of divisional planning
Planning for the entire divisional territory (jurisdiction of the divisional administration). It
could refer to any kind of planning (physical, socio-economic, sectoral).
Generally it refers to a very detailed plan of interventions. At this level the planning proc-
ess would be strongly participatory, becoming therefore demand-oriented
Mostly makes reference to the level where planning takes place. Also called “local level
planning”, it refers to the planning processes that take place at the lowest level of public
administration, i.e. the Local Government level.
In the Sri Lanka context, the definition of local (level) planning is complicated owing to
the existence of two administrative structures at local level (Local Government and Divi-
sional Secretariat)
Out of the many definitions shown in the table, we would like to further clarify some of the terms which will
be relevant to the understanding of this report. We will mostly refer to planning in the sense of comprehen-
sive, participatory, integrated, strategic and spatialised development planning. This understanding is crucial,
since it means that planning is approached not as a subject, but across sectors – all sectors –, and that the
planning process is one that looks into the linkages between the sectors and analyses the entirety of condi-
tions to identify priority areas of intervention. This strategic approach is furthermore not one that generalises
but, on the contrary, one that tries to be specific, also in terms of geographical location. Finally, this under-
standing of planning is one that targets development, understood as a long-term process, rather than looking
at immediate, short-term interventions in the sense of relief and certainly not emergency work. However,
development planning will be closely linked to rehabilitation and reconstruction in view of the circum-
stances prevalent in the northeast of the country.

Let us take a hypothetical example to better explain this way of understanding planning: an in-depth analysis
of the situation in NEP might conclude that the strengthening of tertiary education is one of the main factors
that would substantially contribute to the development of the province as a whole. Such a statement would
not only be of sectoral relevance (i.e. in education it was determined that supporting tertiary education is
more important than supporting secondary education), but of cross-sectoral relevance (i.e. the support of the
educational system, especially regarding tertiary education, needs to be prioritised against, e.g., the construc-
tion of roads). A statement of this nature would obviously not come from a single sector (i.e. education
would not be in a position to put its own priorities above other sectors), but would need to come from an
objective, technical planning unit that has the overall picture, and where all sectoral analysis are weighed
against each other in a holistic approach. Furthermore, the geographical location of interventions resulting
from this prioritised strategy (e.g. the establishment of tertiary educational centres) has to be designed con-
sidering not only sectoral criteria (e.g. the best location in terms of catchment area), but also the linkages to
other sectors (e.g. accessibility in terms of the existing and planned road network).

This kind of planning is not taking place in NEP: not in the sectors (central or devolved), and not at local,
district or provincial level. The immense number of activities taking place on the ground are happening
without proper coordination and without targeting a common objective. We have prepared this report in the
understanding (and assumption) that it is the kind of planning explained above that the provincial admini-
stration wants to establish in NEP in the long run. Therefore, the report looks into the current set-up and the
possibilities of establishing such a planning practice. We will try to give our interpretation of the factors that
have led to the current set-up and indicate which areas could be improved within the given conditions, as
well as the areas that inevitably require a fundamental change of national, provincial and local structures.

We are aware of the fact that NEPC and PPS currently focus on a more immediate, short-term type of plan-
ning, in an attempt to respond to the prolonged damage to the region caused by the ethnic conflict and more
recently by the devastating effects of the 2004 tsunami. However, it is our belief that the response to the tsu-
nami has already been massive and that enough time has passed since December 2004 to consider again
long-term visions. Relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction interventions have created realities that need to
be considered in long-term strategies. As for the conflict, 23 years can hardly be considered a temporary
situation – long-term strategies here are equally necessary.

3
4
 2
APPROACH TO INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

2.1 INSTITUTIONS AND ORGANISATIONS IN DEVELOPMENT

Institutions and organisations are often referred to in the same breath without distinguishing adequately be-
tween them. One reason for this is the fact that they are ‘somehow’ related and overlapping notions. Usually
organisational development involves also institutional change, and vice versa. Yet while we may be con-
cerned in one instance with a single organisation and its institutions for organisational development, institu-
tional transformation could involve several organisations.

The World Development Report (The World Bank, 2003) defines institutions as the rules and organisations
(including informal and formal norms) that coordinate human behaviour. Usually, formal institutions such as
regulations and laws are prevalent in a functioning State mechanism. Yet obviously no society would be able
to function without informal institutions which are based on norms, rules and traditions that encompass trust
and shared values (Thompson and Schwarz, 1990; Renn, 1992).

Broadly speaking, an organisation could be anything from a municipality, a provincial council or the plan-
ning secretariat, which is materialised by its physical location. From this viewpoint, organisations are sub-
sets of institutions. Institutions may be viewed as an umbrella comprising any social unit (Rayner, 1992).
For example, a family or ethnic community is usually perceived as a social institution without being an or-
ganisation, whereas universities or the United Nations are institutions with a strong organisation.

Importantly, the institutional set-up in a given environment is crucial for who controls what kind of re-
sources and who is able to take part in processes of decision-making. In this sense, institutions may be posi-
tively utilised for sustainable and equitable development when they enable people to work with each other to
plan a future. However, barriers to an enabling institutional environment are, for example, dispersed interest,
difficulties of forging credible commitments, and/or institutions that are not inclusive.

Accordingly, we conducted an institutional analysis of the development planning practices and organisations
in the North-East Province with a view to initiating institutional transformation and organisational develop-
ment specifically aimed at the Provincial Planning Secretariat.

2.2 THE ‘WEB’ OF INSTITUTIONALISATION: A TOOL FOR DIAGNOSIS AND INTER-

VENTION 1

The instrument we deploy for the analysis is a framework which can be used to look at the extent of institu-
tionalisation of any policy issue at various levels. This could be at the level of a country, in an organisation
such as a Ministry or an NGO. It can be used as both a diagnostic tool to assess the level of institutionalisa-
tion and an operational tool to guide the direction of interventions.

The notion of a ‘web’ of institutionalisation

The web of institutionalisation is represented by thirteen elements, each of which stands for a site of power
(see figure below). These underlying power relations represent both opportunities as well as resistance in
collective action when it comes to addressing changes within each element. Importantly, “the expression of
power in each of these sites is understood not only as visible products and practices of organisations, but
also in the invisible values and motivations which influence and shape these more tangible outputs of or-
ganisations” (Levy, 1996: 4).

1
This concept is adapted from Levy, Caren, 1996, The Process of Institutionalising Gender in Policy and Planning: The ‘Web’ of Institutionalisation,
University College London, Development Planning Unit, DPU Working Paper No. 74, London. As the title suggests, this tool was originally devel-
oped to diagnose and operationalise the institutionalisation of gender as a cross-cutting issue in development. But it is not confined to this subject
alone and can be applied to any other development issue in the same way (e.g. environment, development planning, disaster mitigation, etc.).

5
Moreover, underlying each element is a set of ‘organisational cultures’. These are associated with the or-
ganisations relating to the respective element. In principle, organisational culture is a combination of shared
symbols, practices, language, rituals and more that are deeply embedded in beliefs, values and norms. In
short, it is a ‘worldview’ constructed by an organisation, or in a more technical parlance it is the ‘software of
the mind’ that is a shared collective phenomenon (Hofstede and Hofstede, 2005).

Apparently, the elements are operated, put in place and shaped by different agents or groups of people in a
range of interrelated spheres. This consequently means that putting all these elements in the web into place
requires collective action through conflict resolution, co-operation, consultation and negotiation at different
levels (local, national, etc.) between the relevant actors.

The elements in the ‘web’ of institutionalisation

In the following we will briefly introduce the elements and their relation to each other. The elements are
grouped in reinforcing triangles along four spheres. Although we discuss the web according to these spheres,
it is pivotal for the understanding of the web that these spheres are not isolated from each other but con-
nected at various nodal points (see figure).

Figure 1
The Web of Institutionalisation
(adapted from Levy 1996)

Bureaucratic Sphere
Political Sphere

Resources Mainstreaming loca-

tion of responsibility

Political commitment Policy / Planning Procedures

Pressure of Representative po- Staff development

political con- litical structures
stituencies

People’s experience Delivery of pro- Methodology

and interpretation grammes and pro-
of their reality jects

Applied research Theory building

Citizen Sphere

Delivery Sphere

The citizen sphere constitutes three elements, which have a strong reference to people’s involvement in
public affairs and hearing their voices. It is by way of grassroots organisations on community level that peo-
ple’s experience and their interpretation of it are articulated. However, for mobilization and consciousness-
raising it is necessary to form new or join with existing political constituencies. It is the pressure of these
political constituencies that is critical to ongoing institutionalisation and addressing change on a collective
level. But this pressure remains insufficient for a sustained process of institutionalisation, unless citizens are
able to engage with representative political structures. Representation relates among others to having equal
numbers of women and men, class, ethnicity, religion and age representatives as appropriate to the context.

6
The above outlined triangle overlaps with another one in the political sphere. To the extent that political
constituencies and representative political structures can exert influence – e.g. through lobbying or direct
action – specific issues can be translated into political commitment. Political commitment indicates ‘the pub-
lic articulation of a political intent’. By its nature, even a dedicated political commitment is not enough. It
needs two further elements, namely policy/planning and resources, to be put into effect. What is important
to the policy and planning aspect is the form of the policy, its content and in particular for planning the proc-
ess of making and implementing it.

Policy and planning is the linking element to the bureaucratic sphere. As we know, adequate resource allo-
cation is indispensable for the support of policy and planning. This depends fundamentally on the main-
stream location of responsibilities for a specific policy issue. A key element in successful institutionalisation
is the clarification that the responsibility of integrating specific issues (e.g. planning practices or disaster
preparedness) in the workings of a ministry, department or organisation is regarded as its responsibility. In
closing this triangle, procedures are an inevitable complement to implement policy and make the clarity of
responsibility workable. Procedures may be viewed as the “routinised” daily activities associated with dif-
ferent points of the programme of an organisation or the rules governing actions within or between organisa-
tions and individuals. Procedures are laid out in an organisation’s guidelines and manuals, and it is through
these that an issue can be integrated in work practices.

A logical consequence of this fact is the opening up of another triangle in this sphere by staff development.
Training in, say, planning policy and skills for all relevant professionals to institutionalise a new aspect in
planning procedures must be an integral part to make policies work. While trainings have become a central
dimension in development, newly acquired skills are often not used if the environment is not conducive. In
other words, policy/planning, procedures and the training dimension of staff development mutually reinforce
each other.

Last but not least, a delivery sphere brings us down to the ground realities of implementation. As the dis-
cussion of effective staff development already indicates, training to integrate specific skills and practices of
practitioners requires a clear methodology. It implies a methodology which has a clear rationale for the inte-
gration of a (new) policy issue into practice as well as tools for operationalising policy issues in the work of
practitioners. This opens up an element in the web which is positioned centre-stage, the delivery of pro-
grammes and projects which are in line with the needs and aspirations of the people. The number of con-
necting lines already indicates that this is the tangible and critical element in the web. One may argue that
the success of all interventions hinges on the assessment of this element.

2.3 OBSERVATIONS ON NORTH-EAST PROVINCE

In view of the above it is necessary to clarify that this institutional analysis has to be limited in its scope. It
would be over-ambitious and disproportionately time-consuming to cover all elements of the spheres in a
conclusive manner. There are however three aspects related to the spheres described above that need to be
mentioned to better understand the wider context of NEP and the struggle of the provincial administration.

Following the amendment of the Constitution in 1987, there have been numerous studies and investigations
pointing at the necessity of implementing the 13th Amendment and specifying some of the requirements in
terms of follow-up, as well as introducing further reforms to have devolution work in Sri Lanka. These
structural reforms have never been implemented, in part due to the non-conducive environment (conflict) but
at the same time contributing to the further deterioration of that same environment. It is important to under-
stand that there is a reluctance of “higher order” to implement generally accepted reforms in this context.
One example is the often-quoted informal process of “re-centralisation” that is taking place in the country
(see e.g. PIP, 2005). This ongoing process is born in the political sphere and negatively influences aspects of
the bureaucratic sphere, with subsequent repercussions in the other spheres.

Another aspect that influences the environment is related to the delivery sphere. The public service is
strongly supply-oriented. Only recently is the need to gradually change to a more demand-oriented public
service being discussed and adopted by sections of the public service. However, this change collides with the

7
aforementioned re-centralisation process and with a much deeper element that is related to the citizen’s
sphere: the apparent fact that Sri Lanka is dominated by a feudal system of society life.

For some analysts we have interviewed, the Sri Lankan democracy is a thin mantle covering a deeply rooted
feudal system, which is what really governs the values and norms of society. Ancient power structures have
survived the transition into a modern State. The groups in the hierarchy might have changed names, but the
“rules of the game” regarding the relationships between them are very much in place. This notion affects the
environment in the sense that the responsibility to serve the subjects is still understood differently by those
occupying political or administrative positions in the State than one that would be required for a modern
State to function. We tend to assume that this precondition for the establishment of modern democracies in
Western societies is also given in Sri Lanka. To understand and explain this idea is certainly an effort that
cannot be attempted in the context of this analysis. However, it is fundamental to know that there are ele-
ments affecting the spheres described above that we need to take into consideration.

In addition to the three aspects described above, we need to emphasise that the prevailing conflict, which has
seen a dramatic aggravation during the time of this analysis, is the paramount and overarching disturbing
element to any analysis and subsequent intervention in the region. The very special situation negatively in-
fluences every aspect of private and public life, therefore also all elements in the spheres described above.
We will try to consider this fact in the analysis that follows.

2.4 CONCLUSION

The notion of the web highlights a series of major concepts which are relevant for this analysis. These in-
clude power, culture, the web links, and collective action for institutional transformation. As a framework it
emphasises interrelations and interdependencies of actors and action, thereby stressing a holistic approach
that illustrates the entirety of an institutional landscape. It points out how things connect to each other. This
is important when it comes to identification of the potentials for change, as “these elements provide means
not only for guiding and even structuring a diagnosis of an existing situation. […] they indicate room for
manoeuvre for change and can provide a means for directing action to promote institutionalisation” (Levy
1996: 4).

For the purpose of our analysis, it is essential to understand who has the power to influence which elements
in the web. And further, from the viewpoint of diagnosing the current situation it will be important to under-
stand what is going on with respect to each element of the web. On the basis of this, we can better identify
the options for our action and the potential room for manoeuvre. As indicated in the figure above and as we
see it, our mandate and the provisional sphere of intervention will most likely take place in the highlighted
elements.

8
 3
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
NORTH-EAST PROVINCE 2

Sri Lanka gained its independence in 1948 (at that time it was still known as Ceylon). What seemed then to
be the start to a sovereign State with peaceful coexistence of various ethnic groups, rapidly changed into a
conflict when Singhalese nationalism grew to become an island-wide nationalism. In the following years,
disputes over citizenship, language and religion deepened the conflict, resulting in an inward-looking Tamil
nationalism, among other responses from the minorities in the country.

In the following decades the situation deteriorated continuously and became more and more complicated,
leading to the radicalisation of groups on both sides. In the late 60s and early 70s, the conflict developed de-
cisively when political groups started to advocate for separatism. This move would fuel the conflict and led
to its sad peak in the 1983 anti-Tamil riots, which also marked the transition from a political to a violent
armed conflict.

The violence motivated the Indian intervention that same year. India forced itself as mediator and had the
Indo-Sri Lanka Accord signed in 1987. The implementation of the accord in the following years, however,
proved to be a failure. Nevertheless, the accord was the basis for two fundamental changes that determine
today’s NEP: first, the formulation and approval of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution with the intro-
duction of a provincial level of government intended to give some autonomy to the Tamil minority, and sec-
ond, the recognition of the Northeast as a unity in the sense of a Tamil homeland, with the (temporary)
amalgamation of the Eastern and Northern Provinces into one.

The North-East Province became the largest in size and second largest in terms of population of all prov-
inces in the country. It embraces eight districts:

Jaffna
Kilinochchi
Mullaitivu
Vavuniya
Mannar
Trincomalee
Batticaloa
Ampara

The total area of NEP is 18,880 km2 (1,888,000 ha), which is equivalent to 29% of the total area of the is-
land. No comprehensive population census has been carried out in the region since 1981. However, the
population has been estimated at 2.62 million in 2003, which represents around 15% of the country’s popu-
lation. The annual average population growth rate is less than 1%, which is roughly on a par with the na-
tional average.

A significant number of people have left the region due to the long-lasting conflict. It is estimated that up to
2005, 65,000 people had been killed, several times as many had been left disabled, and over 800,000 had
been internally displaced. The labour force represents 29% of the population, or 759,000 persons. The un-
employment rate is about 7%.

The GDP for 2002 was estimated at around 105 billion rupees, with the service sector as the main contribut-
ing sector with 49%, followed by agriculture (34%) and industry (17%). A rough estimate of the annual per
2
Source (unless otherwise indicated):
Provincial Planning Secretariat, North-East Provincial Council, Five Year Investment Programme 2006-2010
Provincial Planning Secretariat, North-East Provincial Council, Statistical Information 2005

9
capita income (2003) shows that the provincial per capita income of Rs 53,639 is far below the national av-
erage of Rs 91,479.

The province sustained around 61% of the national damage due to the 2004 tsunami. Some 23,000 people
were accounted dead or missing, and over 330,000 were made landless. The cost of rehabilitation has been
roughly estimated at 24 billion rupees.

Infant mortality rate in 2004 was 9.34‰, with the worst situation reported from Ampara (15.04‰). In the
same year there was 1 doctor per 9190 persons, with the worst situation in Mullaitivu (142,961 persons per
doctor), followed by Jaffna (81,455). The number of hospital beds per 1000 people was around 2.43. Al-
though morbidity and mortality statistics are very unreliable, it can be said that the main diseases in the re-
gion are hypertensive disease, helminthiasis, diabetes, nutritional deficiencies, intestinal infectious disease,
ischaemic heart disease and malaria.

The situation in the education sector is somewhat better as compared to health. The pupil-teacher ratio as of
October 2004 was 1:23.74 (national average is 1:25), although it must be noted that the ratio between pupils
and graduate teachers is 115. The number of children per classroom was 31.8 in primary schools and 28 in
secondary schools in 2005.

Over 75% of all households in Sri Lanka have access to electricity, while in the northeast only around 50%
enjoy the service. In terms of water supply, only 20% of the households in NEP have access to safe water,
while the national average is around 45% (National Physical Planning Department, 2004).

10
 4
LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND
PLANNING REGULATIONS

4.1 THE LAWS

Sri Lanka’s legal system is characterised by a large number of laws, acts, ordinances and other regulations
which have undergone numerous amendments over the years. The amendments are published separately,
having the laws seldom revised to their current phrasing. The large number of laws and the much larger
number of amendments makes it difficult to be “in the picture” in terms of devolution, planning and virtually
any other field of interest to this analysis.

Another characteristic is the fact that the country’s legal framework is based on the British legal system,
with influences from other nations (most notably the Dutch) and clearly shaped to fit cultural intricacies of
the island’s peoples and beliefs. This is certainly so in the context of decentralisation, devolution, govern-
ance, planning and development. Nevertheless, it all fits together into a comprehensive system which, how-
ever, seems to adopt new laws without really repealing what consequently become obsolete regulations.

A third characteristic of Sri Lanka’s legal system is the divergence between written law and actual practice.
There is a gap between these two levels of “institutionalisation” which could probably be best explained by
looking at Sri Lanka’s history and the causes that led to the establishment of most of the current public set-
up (historical society, colonialism, independence, conflict, Indian influence, international pressure).

The Constitution

The supreme law in Sri Lanka, the Constitution (1978), is not only the fundament for all other regulations; it
is also a good example of the situation explained above. It encapsulates most of the topics of interest to this
analysis and is the basis of the complex and counterproductive dual system of government.

The 1978 Constitution enshrines planning [Article 27(2d)], equitable distribution of resources [Art 27(2e)],
and decentralisation and participation [Art 27(4)] as principles of the State. It also defines the “levels” of
State: a national level (executive, legislature and judiciary), an administrative district level (Art 5; estab-
lished under the Administrative District Act, 1955) and a local authority level (Art 170). These important
principles and definitions will be dealt with in the following pages.

The Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution (1987) introduced the provinces as an additional level in
the State apparatus. Later, however, the same amendment would be used to justify the unofficial and contra-
dictory reinforcement of the districts and the divisions as branches of the Central Government structure (now
being referred to as a process of “re-centralisation”). In addition, the Governor (who is directly appointed by
the President) appears as an omnipotent figure at provincial level, only comparable to the President and his
powers at national level. Devolution, which is commonly referred to as the ultimate form of decentralisation
(only surpassed by privatisation of public functions), is presented in the Constitution with a number of in-
built obstacles and exceptions.

The amendment defines responsibilities as they should be shared and distributed among the national and
provincial levels of government. The Ninth Schedule contains the ominous “lists” 3 , an enumeration of

• responsibilities of the provinces (List I: Provincial Council List),

• responsibilities of Central Government (List II: Reserved List), and
• joint responsibilities of Central Government and provinces (List III: Concurrent List).

3
See Annexe 2 for a summary of the functions in each list

11
While the Central Government responsibilities are clearly taken care of by Central Government, it is the
other two groups of functions which are the bone of contention in the context of devolution. Functions from
the two other lists are partially “hijacked” by Central Government, either due to an imposition of stronger
muscle and financial resources of the national level or due to incapacities at provincial level. The question
(and dispute) is therefore not only if this “hijacking” of functions is happening, but also why it is happening.

In any case, the Provincial Government has the legal backing of the Constitution to carry out a large number
of functions, as defined in the Provincial Council List. In view of the stronger position of Central Govern-
ment, in the short-term the Provincial Governments should probably focus on taking full responsibility over
these functions (List I). However, the overlaps between Lists I and III (provincial and concurrent) make it
almost impossible to say that the functions defined in the Provincial List can be really carried out autono-
mously by the provinces. The line dividing the responsibilities is so diffuse that the centre could take charge
of most functions and still find legal justification in the same 13th Amendment that was introduced to de-
volve functions to the provinces.

In the context of this analysis it is important to note that development planning is not explicitly attributed to
any of the levels of State, although planning is defined as one of the principles of State. The Constitution
(including the amendments) refers only to the implementation of plans, not their formulation. This is prob-
lematic, as we will discuss later, since it creates a legal void that results in a “no-man’s land” situation re-
garding development planning.

The Provincial Councils Act

Certified at the same time as the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution (1987), the Provincial Councils
Act further regulates the procedures of provincial councils. The powers of the Governor are specified, as are
the possibilities of direct intervention by the President [e.g. Sec 15, 31, 32, 33(8)].

The Provincial Councils Act also indicates the exceptional role of the Northern and Eastern Provinces in
view of the armed conflict [“… terrorist militant or other groups having as their objective the establishment
of a separate State…”; Section 37 (1b)], conferring the President special powers to deal with the issue until
“he is satisfied” [Sec 37 (1b)].

It is surprising, however, that the Provincial Council Act, being the specific law for Provincial Governments,
does not provide more details on the matter of functions of the provinces. In fact, the Thirteenth Amendment
covers a larger portion of the provisions that govern the provincial level. This applies as well to development
planning and the role the Provincial Government plays in the formulation of plans. In fact, the Provincial
Councils Act is completely silent regarding the functions of the Provincial Government and regulates exclu-
sively certain bureaucratic matters.

The Administrative Districts Act and the District Development Councils Act

As mentioned above, the Administrative Districts Act (1955) defines the districts as an administrative level
of government, specifically “as the areas of authority of Government Agents”. It further subdivides the dis-
trict into divisional Assistant Government Agents’ Divisions. As such, the Act is a rather brief document, in
the understanding that the district and the division are purely administrative extensions of Central Govern-
ment. It does not really reflect the actual significance of the district and the division, the district administra-
tion and the divisional administration, and the Government Agent and the Assistant Government Agent in
development planning and decision-making processes in the districts and divisions in general.

Section 7(4) of the Act, however, stipulates that Government Agents can make by-laws for the districts. This
section is interesting because democratic legislation usually requires the presence of a body of representa-
tives elected by the people to “certify” such legal provision, which is not the case in the districts.

There was, however, another piece of legislation regulating the districts for a short while. In 1980, the Dis-
trict Development Councils Act was enacted and one year later, in 1981, District Development Councils
were established for all administrative districts. However, only a few years later, in 1987, the District
Development Councils were abolished with the passing of the Pradeshiya Sabhas Act. Some of the functions
of these District Development Councils were then transferred to the local authorities, but is not entirely clear
12
these District Development Councils were then transferred to the local authorities, but is not entirely clear
which functions and to what extent.

In general it can be said that districts and divisions are the most ambiguous of the levels and bodies of gov-
ernment, owing to the weak legal regulatory framework under which they operate and, for that matter, exist.

Local Government Laws: Pradeshiya Sabhas, Urban Councils and Municipal Councils

Since 1987, there are three types of Local Governments in Sri Lanka:

• Pradeshiya Sabhas,
• Urban Councils, and
• Municipal Councils,

each one with a specific legal provision:

• Pradeshiya Sabhas Act 1987,

• Urban Councils Ordinance 1987 (original from 1940), and
• Municipal Councils Ordinance 1987 (original from 1947).

The previously existing town councils and village councils were dissolved with the introduction of the
Pradeshiya Sabhas.

The objective of the Local Governments is “to provide greater opportunities for the people to participate
effectively in decision-making process” (Pradeshiya Sabhas Act, introduction). This objective clearly places
participation of the grassroots in the centre of the activities of Local Governments, above all other functions.
To carry out this objective, the Local Governments are established as body corporate with all rights and du-
ties that this implies. One of the rights devolved to Local Government is the power to formulate and pass by-
laws. The presence of an elected council is however required for that purpose.

While Urban and Municipal Councils were established for urban areas, the more rural Pradeshiya Sabhas
were established to match the areas of Assistant Government Agents (divisions). Section 2(1) clearly states
that the limits of a Pradeshiya Sabha “shall, as far as possible, correspond to limits of an Assistant Govern-
ment Agent’s’ division”. The fact that the areas of jurisdiction of Local Governments and divisions do not
always match has to be “blamed” on both the Local Governments and the Divisional Secretariats, since the
creation of new Local Government areas (splitting of Pradeshiya Sabhas, creation of Urban Councils, etc.)
and the creation of new divisions or the amendment of the areas of existing divisions disrupt the system.

The declaration of Local Government areas is, in general, problematic. There seem to be no clear criteria for
such a purpose, at least not in legal form. This is true for the establishment of new Local Government areas
as well as for the “promotion” of certain areas to Urban Council areas or Municipal Council areas. This
leads to the arbitrary amendment of boundaries, largely for reasons other than technical ones.

The Pradeshiya Sabhas Act is not explicit regarding the planning function of the Local Government. Plan-
ning for the integral development of its area of jurisdiction is not mentioned. However, Section 19(1)(XXI)
refers to the delegation of certain functions from the Development Council, which existed at district level
from 1980 to 1987, as explained above. In section 12(2), the Act specifies four main committees that the
Local Government should establish (at least) to fulfil its objective. These are:

• Finance and policy making

• Housing and community development
• Technical services
• Environment and amenities

13
The first committee mentioned is of special interest, since it deals with policy making. While there is great
scope for discussion as to what exactly this provision might entail, it cannot be denied that a certain amount
of development planning is involved. This is, however, not explicit.

The Urban Councils Ordinance and the Municipal Councils Ordinance do not provide substantial differences
or clearer indications regarding planning functions allocated to the Local Governments. Both however, re-
peat the above-mentioned delegation of functions from the Development Councils. All three legal provisions
state that the Local Governments have the responsibility of implementation of plans, not the initial formula-
tion of such. Sovereignty over development planning remains unclear.

The Transfer of Powers (Divisional Secretaries) Act

In 1992, Parliament passed the Transfer of Powers (Divisional Secretaries) Act. The Act is meant “to pro-
vide for the transfer of powers, functions and duties exercised, performed and discharged by Government
Agents under various laws, to Divisional Secretaries.” The Act does not specify any such powers, functions
and duties. It only mentions that such a transfer is possible and should be established by law. Similarly, the
Act also provides for the transfer of powers, functions and duties from Provincial Councils and from provin-
cial Governors [Section 3(2)]. As such, the Transfer of Powers (Divisional Secretaries) Act only legalises
the possibility of transfer of powers to the Divisional Secretariats. The actual mandate has to be specified in
other laws.

The Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance

The Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance was first established in 1915 and was last amended in
1980. It is one of the laws that deal with development and planning of specific subjects, and the role of Local
Governments in that respect. The ordinance stipulates in Section 28 the capacity of local authorities to re-
serve (via by-laws) special areas for specific use, and in Section 33 for management and use of land. Sec-
tions 36 to 63 refer to “improvement schemes”, the forerunners to modern urban physical development
plans. Yet again, overall development planning is not dealt with, especially since the improvement schemes
refer to specific interventions on existing infrastructure, rather than urban development.

The Town and Country Planning Ordinance

The original Town and Country Planning Ordinance was passed in 1947. It was the first comprehensive
regulatory framework to provide a legal basis for physical planning in Sri Lanka “to make schemes for plan-
ning and development of land”. According to the ordinance, there is a Coordinating Committee at national
level (“Inter-Ministerial Coordinating Committee on National Physical Planning”) to approve, advise and
make recommendations on physical planning matters. At regional level, there are “regional development
areas”, for which there are specific Regional Planning Committees. The members in such Regional Planning
Committees are:

The Chief Secretary of the Provincial Council (chairperson)

A representative from each local authority
The District Secretaries (Government Agents)
A representative of the Urban Development Authority
An officer from the Surveys Department
A representative from the Road Development Authority
Not more than three other persons nominated by the Minister

The responsibilities for town and country planning (planning authority) regarding regional planning are
vested in the Regional Planning Committee. In the 2000 Amendment (Act No. 49), Section 5A(d) stipulates
that “the duties and functions of the Director General of the National Physical Planning shall be (…) to pre-
pare any regional or local plan where the regional or local planning authority fails in, or requests, the
preparation of such plan” and further “to assist Provincial Councils in the preparation and development of
regional physical plans.” This ordinance is therefore the first (and so far only) one to concede clear man-
dates to the local and provincial authorities in terms of development planning. However, town and country
planning is largely understood as land use planning, which – although it cuts across sectors – is still not

14
equal to an overall and comprehensive planning mandate. It therefore does not entirely clarify the question
of sovereignty in terms of overall development planning.

Sections 18-37 of the ordinance deal with the planning procedure, and Sections 38-45 and some schedules
deal with the contents of the plans mentioned above. The plans, called “schemes” in the original ordinance,
are of two types: “outline physical plans” and “detail plans”. All plans have to be approved by the Minister,
both at local and regional level. The planning authority has to seek ministerial approval to prepare a plan and
to have it approved.

At local level, the ordinance makes a difference between larger urban areas (Municipal Council areas and
Urban Council areas) and other areas. Municipal and Urban Council areas are automatically urban develop-
ment areas, while other places can be declared as such by the Minister responsible. The planning authority in
the case of Municipal and Urban Councils is the local authority, while in the case of other areas it lies jointly
with the Director Town and Country Planning (Colombo) and the chairperson of the local council (Prade-
shiya Sabha).

The Urban Development Authority Law

In 1978, the Urban Development Authority (UDA) was introduced by law (amendments to the law until
1984). The UDA should “promote integrated planning and implementation of economic, social and physical
development”. The law determines that the Minister declares urban development areas, which means that
those areas fall under the (planning) responsibility of the UDA (Sec. 3; Sec. 23). Unfortunately, the Act does
not provide any guidance in terms of criteria to be used by the minister when doing so. On the contrary, Sec-
tion 3(1) reads: “Where the Minister is of opinion that any area is suitable for development, the Minister
may (…) declare such area to be an Urban Development Area (…)”.

In Sections 8a-k, the law sets out the planning procedure where it becomes clear that UDA plans, the local
authority comments, and the minister approves. The obvious contradictions between UDA Law and Town
and Country Planning Ordinance were resolved in Section 23, which ranks the UDA law above the ordi-
nance. A schedule to the UDA Law specifies the contents of development plans.

The Urban Authority Law unfortunately reverses the devolution of the planning mandate to the local and
provincial level as established under the Town and Country Planning Ordinance, giving it back to the central
level, at least in relationship with urban areas. Furthermore, plans prepared in line with this legislation are
not limited to physical aspects, but explicitly incorporate economic and social aspects. From our observa-
tions we can conclude, however, that UDA plans still reflect an understanding similar to the one described
above regarding town and country planning.

The reality on the ground is however somewhat different to the image of UDA according to the law. As we
will explain later on, UDA is rather weak in the region. A clear indication of this is the rarity of public com-
pliance with requirements set by planning and building regulation, e.g. the need of building permits. The
public does not feel the pressure to follow the proper procedures owing to the weak enforcement of the laws.

National Environmental Act

In 1980, Parliament passed the National Environmental Act (Act No. 47), which has been since then
amended in 1988 (Act No. 56) and in 2000 (Act No. 53). The Act not only introduced the Central Environ-
mental Authority (CEA), but also provided it with certain roles in the context of planning, more specifically
in land use management. Part IV of the Act mandates the CEA to formulate land use schemes. The objective
of such land use schemes is “to provide a rational, orderly and efficient system of the acquisition, utilization
and disposition of land and its resources…” (Section 15a).

The Act is not specific regarding the level at which such schemes should be prepared (national, regional,
local). However, it does specify the power the CEA might have towards the Local Governments: “The Au-
thority may (…) give to any local authority in writing such directions (…) which the Authority deems neces-
sary for safeguarding and protecting the environment (…)” [Section 12(1)]. Further, “Every local authority
to which direction has been given (…) shall comply with such direction” [Section 12(2)].

15
General observation on the laws

After having studied the aforementioned laws we have to say that two questions remain unanswered:

(1) Who is legally established as the main agent or authority responsible for overall development plan-
ning at provincial and local level, and
(2) Who is legally established as the main agent or authority responsible for physical and overall devel-
opment planning in rural areas (other than areas as defined under UDA Law)?

4.2 OTHER REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES

Planning Manual for local authorities

In 1990, the Urban Development Authority and USAID formulated a Planning Manual for local authorities.
The manual targets all local authorities, “irrespective of size or its urban or rural character”. However, in
most parts of the document talk is about “urban local authorities”, a clear indication of the bias of the man-
ual.

The manual departs from the traditional master planning and suggests a more practical approach to planning.
It proposes a specific organisational set-up and introduces three concepts to replace master planning: “plan-
ning for action”, “structure planning” and “local planning”. In addition, it addresses the issue of “economic
planning”, which is more one of budgeting than of economic development planning.

The document contains various interesting ideas and suggestions, and seeks to integrate physical and eco-
nomic planning. Noteworthy is the fact that UDA recognises that “the head of the local council has the legal
authority and primary responsibility for directing planning activities”, especially since “as part of the pro-
gramme of decentralisation and devolution of governmental powers, planning activities previously under-
taken by the UDA at its headquarters in Colombo have been delegated to heads of urban local authorities”.
This arrangement has probably been made via government circular, since the law does not specify it this
way, as explained above.

The manual points out the importance of coordination among the various stakeholders at local and provincial
level and suggests some coordination mechanisms. However, it is not clear regarding the roles of the various
development agents, i.e. the provincial administration and the Divisional Secretariats, along with the local
authority. In general, the manual assumes certain relationships between local authority and Divisional Secre-
tariat, without being explicit, creating some gaps in the logic of the proposals. In the end, it is not clear either
what is meant by “urban local authority”.

Manual on Provincial and Divisional Planning

The Government of Sri Lanka and UNDP commissioned the MARGA Institute to formulate a Manual on
Provincial and Divisional Planning. Unfortunately, the document does not give any indication as to when it
was prepared. We assume that it was prepared before the Manual of Regional Planning formulated by NPPD
(see the section below), some time in the 1990s.

The manual is intended as a guide for the formulation of development plans at provincial and divisional
level. It addresses the set-up required for provincial planning (e.g. the establishment of provincial planning
offices), specifies the process involved and gives some insights into the contents of such plans. It contains
valuable attempts to resolve the question of how to set the “ceilings” to the plans and provides some ideas
regarding the establishment of a databank as a basis for the planning process.

The document, although formulated some years ago, comes to some still relevant conclusions:

• Provincial planning is the crucial planning framework for interventions in the province and subse-
quent plans (district, local)

16
 • Divisional planning is the key to implementation of national and provincial goals
• Planning at local level can be the responsibility of the local authorities, but should be carried out by
the divisional staff

The manual includes no reference to the (previously formulated?) Planning Manual for local authorities.

Planning Procedure
North-East Provincial Council

In early 1999, NEPC issued the Planning Procedure, a manual to provide an overview of the entire develop-
ment planning process at provincial, district and divisional level. It tried to summarise the various planning
practices of the time, as they were being carried out in NEP at the various levels. It touches on all main
stakeholders in terms of development planning, all relevant processes and procedures, a large number of in-
struments and an even larger number of units involved in the planning processes. It follows a basic planning
sequence:

• Situation analysis
• Formulation of objectives and priorities
• Identification of strategies
• Formulation of programmes and projects
• Preparation of investment plans
• Operationalisation
• Implementation
• Monitoring

The manual hardly touches on the role of the local authorities, focusing very much on the structure division-
district-province. It makes reference neither to the manual prepared by the UDA in 1990, nor to the manual
prepared by the MARGA Institute.

Divisional Annual Implementation Programme from Year 2000 Under Local Level Development
Planning Process (North East Province)

In late 1999, Chief Secretary NEPC issued a circular intended at shifting the main responsibility on man-
agement of resources in the development planning process from the Divisional Secretariats to the Local
Councils, specifically the Pradeshiya Sabhas (Municipal and Urban Councils were not addressed). The cir-
cular established a new Local Level Development Planning Process, but left many aspects open for later
resolution.

The circular tries to establish an integrated approach to planning and to avoid “’wish list’ planning culture”,
introducing “a rational planning system”. It retains most of the planning activities at the Divisional Secre-
tariats and gives more authority to the Pradeshiya Sabhas in terms of decision-making. Final approvals,
however, are set at provincial level.

The circular introduces some important elements that should be highlighted:

• The planning process includes a participatory process at grassroots level via community hearings at
each Grama Niladhari division
• Each Pradeshiya Sabha should establish and maintain a database
• Each Pradeshiya Sabha should formulate 4-year “corporate plans”
• Annual priorities should lead to annual implementation programmes

According to our information, the circular was neither utilised by the Divisional Secretariats nor the Local
Governments.

17
A Manual of Regional Planning
(for Members of Regional Planning Committees)

A Manual of Regional Planning was prepared by the National Physical Planning Department in 2001. It is
intended to guide the members of Regional Planning Committees (see Town and Country Planning Ordi-
nance above) in their task of formulating Regional Plans.

The manual focuses on the process of formulation of such plans, rather than on giving details regarding its
contents. The implication is that actual plan contents, not only in this case, are something that the profes-
sionals “will take care of”. Laws and regulations are limited to the bureaucratic aspects of planning. Never-
theless, the manual provides a general list of contents of such plans.

The manual strongly supports a participatory approach to planning and mutely assumes the principle of sub-
sidiarity, as it sees the National Physical Planning Department as a provider of assistance to the provincial
administrations when they are not in a position to formulate regional plans by themselves. It is doubtful,
however, that – to give an example – the production of the (draft) Eastern Province Physical Plan, which
took place before the 2004 tsunami, really followed the regulations and their participatory spirit. In fact, the
Regional Planning Committee was never established and therefore approved neither the formulation of such
a plan nor the draft. Approval at higher (national) level is now not possible without provincial approval. The
plan is stuck in bureaucratic limbo.

Unified Local Level Development Planning Procedure

In 2006, Chief Secretary NEPC issued a circular to review the planning system established 1999. The main
difference to its 1999 predecessor is the stronger role of the Local Governments in the following aspects:

• Grassroots participation (including a new proposal)

• Approval of all interventions at local level
• Implementation of activities
• Monitoring of interventions
• Post-project responsibilities (e.g. operation and maintenance; institutional arrangements for sustain-
ability)

The circular was adopted during a Provincial Planning Committee meeting in late March 2006. Its imple-
mentation was supposed to start immediately. However, the new planning procedure, as it focuses mainly on
the strengthening of the role of local authorities, does not address the root causes that might have led to the
failure in the implementation of the 1999 procedure. Therefore, the circular should be seen as an initial input
that requires work on various aspects of the processes involved in local level planning. The task of working
on these issues and providing ggguidance to the local authorities should be mainly for the Provincial Plan-
ning Secretariat.

4.3 SAMPLE OF EXISTING (INTEGRAL) DEVELOPMENT PLANS

Provincial level

Five Year Investment Programme 2006-2010

In 2005, the North-East Provincial Council, through its Provincial Planning Secretariat, formulated a Five
Year Investment Programme 2006-2010, where it defined provincial development priorities. The document
however only considers eight sectors: education, health, agriculture, irrigation, animal husbandry, industries,
provincial roads and rural electrification. The generally poor socio-economic situation of the region, the
long-lasting civil war and more recently the devastating effects of the 2004 tsunami were the fundamental
factors which influenced the definition of these objectives. The priorities are:

Restoring livelihoods
Reactivating services and facilities

18
 Rehabilitation of infrastructure facilities
Development of human capacities
Targeting vulnerable groups
Establishment of good governance

The main idea behind the definition of these priorities is to focus on development activities that aim at put-
ting the region back where it was 20 years ago, as the last two decades have been marked by regress, rather
than progress. In order to avoid falling into mere activism, the activities so defined should be embedded in
long-term development goals.

Eastern Province Physical Plan

The Eastern Province Physical Plan is an integral plan prepared by a team of consultants commissioned by
the National Physical Planning Department. The plan was prepared between 2002 and 2004, and has not yet
been approved. Final approval of the plan is doubtful in view of the effects of the 2004 tsunami and its im-
plications on the information provided in the plan. In addition, the required Regional Planning Committee
was never established, which has now created a legal void in the approval process as explained above.

Leaving aside the changed conditions owing to the tsunami and the formal mistakes committed in the formu-
lation process, the plan is a comprehensive document that summarises some of the crucial data required to
strategise the development interventions in the Eastern part of NEP. It has fundamental flaws (most notably
in terms of demographic information), but nevertheless reflects an analytical process that tries to put objec-
tive information at the centre of decision-making. Whether the information is manipulated or not is difficult
to assess.

The NPPD is currently preparing the production of a similar plan for the Northern part of NEP.

District level

District Plans

• Ministry of Rehabilitation, Resettlement and Refugees, Programme Framework for Resettlement,

Rehabilitation, Reconstruction and Development (“Jaffna Plan”), 2003
• Ministry of Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconciliation, Programme Framework for Rehabilitation
and Development of Vavuniya District, 2004
• Ministry of Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconciliation, Rehabilitation and Development Framework
for Mannar District, 2004
• Ministry of Nation Building and Development, Rehabilitation and Development Framework for
Killinochchi District, 2005
• Ministry of Nation Building and Development, Rehabilitation and Development Framework for
Mullaitivu District, 2006

Between 2003 and 2006, the now Ministry of Nation Building and Development prepared district develop-
ment plans, assisted by the GTZ-managed Northern Rehabilitation Project. Based on the assessment of the
documents and the use made of them in the respective districts, it must be concluded that the documents
have a certain value in the compilation effort of data and information they contain. The documents however
appear not to be user-friendly, judging from the degree of acceptance in various planning offices. Unfortu-
nately, the reliability of the data provided is, at least in sample cases, questionable. The documents are not
consistent throughout the chapters, which leaves serious doubts about their credibility as reliable sources for
decision-making.

Local level (DS/Pradeshiya Sabha/UC/MC)

At local level, there appears to be no example of integral development plans in NEP. Although mandated to
do so, local authorities have not been able to prepare integrated medium or long-term development plans.
The same applies to the Divisional Secretariats. What the planning units at this level have been doing is a
compilation of projects based on demands from various sources, primarily the communities. A plan that fol-

19
lows the logic of a situational analysis and posterior prioritisation and formulation of strategies is not avail-
able.

4.4 CONCLUSIONS

The legal system of Sri Lanka reflects the entire socio-political situation of the country. It it is in part a con-
sequence the ethnic conflict, creates dual government structures (central vs devolved), tries to accommodate
Central Government interests and international demands, and describes the passing of each regime through
the establishment of new laws and institutions. Many laws are created to satisfy the demands of the govern-
ments of the day and their allies, generating duplications and contradictions, as well as laws and institutions
which become obsolete without being revoked or dissolved.

The legal system also shows where some of the problems may be found in terms of planning interventions.
Strategic and integral development planning is not attributed explicitly to any of the many organisations that
are active in this field. Each ministry appears to prepare so-called integral plans, which invariably leads to
all plans becoming redundant in view of their sheer. At local level, the existence of a dual system of gov-
ernment with the Local Governments on one side and the Divisional Secretariat on the other, makes the con-
fusion complete. The need for amalgamation of these two is so obvious that neither side denies its necessity.
Between national and local level, the province and the district have integral development plans for their ar-
eas being prepared in Colombo. The “hijacking” of functions at national level goes hand in hand with the
incapacity of assuming those same functions at sub-national levels.

The existence of a number of guidelines and manuals for planning at provincial and local level contrasts
with the lack of plans prepared following those guidelines and manuals. It appears to be that new guidelines
are formulated regularly, but never used. We are of the opinion that most of the guidelines are of a relatively
good quality and that the fact that they have not been used is probably more related to the low capacity and
weak commitment of the organisations they targeted. Ironically, there appears to be no guideline or manual
for district development planning, but it is at that level that most plans have been formulated.

We believe that most of these problems either arise because a basic principle of State-building is not fol-
lowed or at least could be resolved by adopting it: subsidiarity. In the context of State-building, subsidiarity
means, simply put: “as low as possible, as high as necessary”. Regarding planning, the principle is usually
applied as follows: a development plan should be formulated, whenever possible, at the level for which it is
meant. This means a Pradeshiya Sabha plan should be formulated at and by the Pradeshiya Sabha, a district
development plan should be formulated at the district, a provincial plan should be formulated at the prov-
ince, etc. Only when the respective level organisation is definitely not in a position to carry out the function,
should the immediately following level organisation come in to assist the process. This immediately follow-
ing level organisation comes in as a subsidiary to the lower level. Thus, when the Pradeshiya Sabha cannot
formulate its plan, the district comes in to provide assistance. When the District Secretariat cannot formulate
a district development plan, the provincial administration comes in and assists the district. When the prov-
ince is unable to formulate its integral provincial development plan, national level comes in and assists the
province in formulating its plan.

We have not found this principle anchored in the Constitution or in any other law. In fact, every law in Sri
Lanka undermines subsidiarity. This could be an indication of the half-heartedness of the devolution effort in
Sri Lanka since 1987. Central Government still claims the right to carry out functions at the lowest levels of
State, and by doing so undermining any possibility of the lower levels to develop the capacity they need to
assume their roles and carry out their functions.

In terms of planning mandate and authority, only the Town and Country Planning Ordinance gives a clear
mandate to the local and provincial authorities. This relates however only to physical plans of a specific na-
ture, i.e. those defined in the same ordinance. On the other hand, manuals and guidelines are more forthcom-
ing in relation to the planning sovereignty of the devolved levels of government. This is a clear indication of
how the law is interpreted, whereby plan formulation is attributed to the provinces and local bodies. At the
same time, however, the law provides for direct intervention of Central Government in provincial and local
planning matters in many cases, undermining the intended devolution of power over development planning.

20
It therefore remains a diffuse subject, where decentralised structures of government can autonomously exert
planning powers, but only as long as the centre does not want to interfere.

21
22
 5
INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

5.1 GENERAL SET-UP

To fully understand all arrangements of the “dual” system of government in Sri Lanka is hardly possible,
especially on the ground. The simultaneous existence of devolved and central/deconcentrated government
organisations at each level of State, and their formal and informal relationships, results in a web that nobody
seems to comprehend in its totality. Each individual we have interviewed in this respect draws a different
picture of the structure of State. For instance, it took us weeks to understand that the Divisional Secretariats
and the Local Governments are at the same level in the State structure. This confusion is a consequence of
the mixing up of the levels of State (horizontal) and what we want to call the “lines of command” of the
State (vertical).

Similarly, and more seriously, Local Government is not understood as the government at local level, but
only as the office of one department of one of the provincial ministries in a Local Government area; some-
thing like a provincial sectoral branch. This understanding reflects the incapacity of the functionaries and
authorities to comprehend the meaning of division of functions in the structure of State and the real concept
of Local Government. We will come back to this in the following chapters.

Putting the pieces of the puzzle together, we attempted the (almost impossible) task of a graphic representa-
tion of the Sri Lankan State in one chart. Our understanding of the institutional environment can be summa-
rised as follows.

Figure 2
Levels of State administration

National

Provincial Provincial

District District District District

LG area / LG area / LG area / LG area / LG area / LG area / LG area / LG area /

Division Division Division Division Division Division Division Division

GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN GN
area area area area area area area area area area area area area area area area

The Grama Niladhari is at the bottom of the State structure, being the public servant closest to the grassroots.
Beyond him is the population, organised in villages and other forms of community.

It is important to note that out of these five levels of State, three have governments in their own right:

• National (President, Parliament),

• Provincial (Provincial Council), and
• Local (Pradeshiya Sabha, Urban Council, Municipal Council).

The district and the GN division are purely administrative levels.

23
The situation at Local Government level is the most confusing. There are two legally established bodies
(Local Government and Divisional Secretariat), and their areas of jurisdiction are not always the same.
Worse, the creation of new Local Government areas (usually through splitting of Pradeshiya Sabha areas) as
well as the changing of divisional boundaries is making things more complicated. If this practice is not
stopped soon, the result will be a totally dysfunctional system at local level.

The “lines of command” of the State are divided into two main “sections” along public functions: the de-
volved functions and the central/deconcentrated functions.

Figure 3
“Lines of command” of the State

Central Government

Ministry of Provincial Ministry of Home Affaires Other ministries Other ministries

Councils and LG

Provincial Council

Provincial branches of central Provincial branches of central

ministries ministries
Provincial ministries

District branches of provincial District administration District branches of central District branches of central
ministries ministries ministries

Local Gov- Divisional Divisional administration Divisional branches of central Divisional branches of central
ernment branches of ministries ministries
provincial
departments

With the passing of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1987, certain functions were devolved to the
Provincial Governments. We speak of devolution of powers when major decisions are autonomously made
at a level different from the national level, for which we need additional representation of the people. The
13th Amendment introduced the provincial councils for this reason: in an attempt to give more autonomy to
the regions, specifically to the Tamil-dominated North and East.

A contradiction to this idea of devolution of powers is the arrangement in which the Provincial Governments
come “under” a central ministry, the Ministry of Provincial Councils and Local Government. This is not in-
tended in theory, but reality shows that the ministry instructs the provinces. Furthermore, all managerial po-
sitions in the provincial administration are subject to Central Government approval, in some cases through
direct appointments by the president, in others through the approval of the Governor, the top-most represen-
tative of Central Government in the province.

Even more obvious, fiscal autonomy has not been arranged to give real meaning to devolution. The provin-
cial administration largely depends on transfers from Central Government. It is estimated that the provinces
can make autonomous decisions in terms of financial allocations over 5% of the national budget (although
the ‘devolved’ budget is around 15%).

24
At local level the situation becomes almost absurd. Apart from the administrative structures of Central and
Provincial Governments, the Local Governments come in, in contemporary State theory, an autonomous
third level of government. In practice, however, the illusion of devolution from central to provincial level
repeats itself at local level, having the corporate bodies (Local Governments) reduced to mere branches of
the Department of Local Government, which is part of the provincial Ministry of Public Administration, Lo-
cal Government, Co-operative Development, Road Development, Rural Development, Industries and Man-
agement Development & Training.

A good example of the absurdity of this system is precisely the planning function. Planning units at the Lo-
cal Governments have no relationship to their equivalent unit at provincial level, the Provincial Planning
Secretariat. Communication from a planner at local level has to go to the Secretary of that particular Local
Government, from where it goes to the Regional Assistant Commissioner Local Government (a provincial
position at district level; not a planner), to be later submitted to the Commissioner Local Government (at the
provincial administration; not a planner). Eventually, the communication would find its way to the Provin-
cial Planning Secretariat. The reality is not difficult to imagine: this communication seldom actually takes
place.

The system explained above holds true for all provinces in Sri Lanka. In addition, NEP has significant par-
ticularities that make everything even more complicated. The ethnic conflict is the common denominator to
these particularities.

One symptom of the particularity of NEP is the absence of an elected council. Since the first council was
dissolved only a few years after it had been elected for the very first time, elections have been postponed
indefinitely. This has created a void of power in NEP, strengthening the position of Central Government in
general and of the Governor in particular. Important decisions, e.g. the geographical and sectoral allocation
of funds, are mostly made – directly or indirectly – in Colombo.

An additional particularity of the ethnic conflict is the presence of the LTTE. The LTTE and especially its
Planning and Development Secretariat play an important role in NEP. This role cannot be however general-
ised to all areas of NEP equally. It varies significantly between government-controlled and LTTE-controlled
areas. In any case, the provincial administration (and Provincial Planning Secretariat as part of it) is regu-
larly called to coordinate activities, as well as the district and divisional administrations (e.g. Government
Agents). In fact, after the 2002 ceasefire agreement, the government issued a circular directing all public
servants in NEP, especially GAs, to work in consultation with the LTTE in the context of all development
activities. This directive has not been revoked and is therefore still in force. From an LTTE perspective, the
provincial administration is an important stakeholder in NEP and should become a vehicle for development
of the region. This, however, should happen in line with LTTE interests. On the other hand, LTTE would
probably not want the provincial administration to be too successful, therefore undermining the efforts of the
LTTE. These circumstances put the NEPC in a very difficult situation.

From our observations we can conclude that the relationship between NEPC, particularly Provincial Plan-
ning Secretariat, and LTTE, is not an easy one. However, NEPC plays a very important role as unwilling
link between LTTE and Central Government. This role is not really clear to all parties involved, but it is at
NEPC that interests from both sides come together and have to be reconciled. From this point of view,
NEPC and the Planning Secretariat can play a vital role in the resolution of the conflict, working on a pro-
fessional level where decisions are made on the basis of technical considerations, rather than on subjective
information which currently influences the decision-making process.

The general public set-up in NEP may be understood as explained in the figure below.

25
 Figure 4
Institutional structure of the State and NEPC

President Parliament

Min. of Prov. Ministry of Min. of Home

Councils + LG Nation Build- Affaires
ing + Dev.

Prov. NEPC Prov. Governor

Council Council

Chief Minister

Chief Secretary

Min.
Publ. LTTE
Adm. PDS
+ LG

Secre- Secre- Secre- Secr. Secre-

Nat. Nat.
tary tary tary Public tary
ministry ministry
Admin. +
branch branch
LG PPS

Depart- Dept. Depart-

ment LG ment

District District District

Dist. officers Dist. officers Dist. officers Secretariat Secretariat Secretariat
(Ass. Comm. (Ass. Comm. (Ass. Comm. (Gov. Agent / (Gov. Agent / (Gov. Agent /
Dist. Comm. / Dist. Comm. / Dist. Comm. /
LG) LG) LG) Dist. Secre.) Dist. Secre.) Dist. Secre.)

LG Divisional Divisional Divisional

Secretariat Secretariat Secretariat
MC UC Prad. Div. Div. Div. (Divis. Secr. / (Divis. Secr. / (Divis. Secr. /
Divis. Comm.) Divis. Comm.) Divis. Comm.)
Sab. offi- offi- offi-
cers cers cers

Grama Grama Grama

Niladhari Niladhari Niladhari

Village
Appointed in consultation with the Chief Minister

Influence / pressure

Unclear relationship, not institutionalised

26
The figure above includes the core organisations in the public sector. In addition to what is shown, we would
need to include all ministerial branches at provincial, district and divisional/Local Government level.

What is shown:

The five levels of administration (separated by a dotted line: national, provincial, district, local, commu-
nal)
The three levels of State which have elected representation (in yellow: President and Parliament at na-
tional level, Provincial Council at provincial level, and the three types of Local Government at local
level)
The central ‘line of command’ (in green, from the national ministries to the grama niladharis)
The provincial ‘line of command’ (in blue)
The half-way autonomous Local Councils (in yellow) with their local administration (in blue)
The presence of the LTTE and its Planning and Development Secretariat

Not shown:

The national ministries have branches at district and divisional level, which do not function under the
District or Divisional Secretariat
The provincial Department of Local Government has a supervisory role over the Local Governments
The Divisional Secretariat also carries out provincial functions
The Provincial Council of NEPC is not in place, therefore there is no Chief Minister and there are no
provincial Ministers
Owing to the absence of the Provincial Council, the Governor acts as political figure, which effectively
makes the devolution of powers a farce
The figure shows only the situation in government-controlled areas

5.2 FISCAL DEVOLUTION

The process of devolution based on the 13th Amendment to the Constitution relies to a great extent on a si-
multaneous process of fiscal devolution. The establishment of an adequate system of fiscal devolution re-
quires not only the distribution of functions between central and devolved levels of government; it also re-
quires an estimation of the costs of carrying out those functions. The Sri Lankan government does not have
such estimation. At the time of the establishment of provinces, Central Government calculated the required
budget to be devolved by adding the budgets of the sub-national units of that time.

In addition to the reasons that might have led to the lack of such a fundamental information, the so-called
“concurrent list” defined in the 13th Amendment makes the calculation almost impossible, since the concur-
rent list includes functions to be carried out jointly by the Central and Provincial Governments. The current
situation suggests, however, that the required financial empowerment of the Provincial and Local Govern-
ments is insufficient to match the functions these decentralised levels of government have been given.

5.2.1 Assessment, allocation and apportionment of provincial funds

Provincial and Local Governments receive together around 15% of the total national budget (including some
bilateral and multilateral foreign funding). 10% remains at provincial level and 5% is further transferred to
the Local Governments. A much larger portion of the budget reaches the communities bypassing the Provin-
cial Government, most of it even without the involvement of the Local Governments. This larger portion is
channelled directly through national Ministries to their field offices and to the Divisional Secretariats.

The distribution of funds – most of which are eventually spent in the communities – between the centre and
the devolved structures means also that 85% of the sectoral distribution (i.e. the distribution of available
funds amongst education, health, agriculture, roads, etc.) mirror national priorities, while only 15% mirror
Provincial and Local Government priorities.

27
The devolved budget

The annual budgeting cycle can be summarised as follows. Each Provincial Government prepares budgetary
needs based on its expected expenditure. These needs are assessed and negotiated with the Finance Commis-
sion, an independent national body established under the 13th Amendment. The Finance Commission adds
all provincial needs and submits a total to the Treasury. In negotiations with the National Budget Depart-
ment, an amount of funds is fixed for the total allocation to provinces out of the national budget. On that ba-
sis, the amounts for recurrent and capital expenditures are allocated. Finally, the Finance Commission ap-
plies the criteria used to determine the apportionment of the allocated funds amongst the provinces. The
provinces receive the funds either directly from the Treasury or through the Ministry of Provincial Councils
and Local Governments. The process is shown in the figure below (Finance Commission, 2005).

Figure 5
Distribution of the National Budget

President Parliament

5
Cabinet of Ministers

4
7

Ministry of Finance
3

Finance Ministry of Prov.

Commission Councils and LG

2
Provincial
Councils

Provincial
Ministries
10

Divisional Field Local Donor-funded

Secretariats officers Governments projects

15% of total national budget (including foreign funds)

5% of total national budget (⅓ or 33% of the provincial + LG budget)
1-10
Sequence

Source: The Finance Commission, Annual Report 2004, Colombo, 2005

28
5.2.2 Funding channels

From the point of view of the communities, Central Government uses various channels to transfer funds
from national level to eventually reach the people. These channels can be categorised as follows:

1. Central Government allocations

2. Projects
3. Decentralised (Capital) Budget (DCB)
4. Transfers and grants:
4.1 Block Grant
4.2 Criteria-Based Grant (CBG)
4.3 Province-Specific Development Grant (PSDG)
4.4 Matching Grant

Figure 6
Channels of funding from national to local level

DCB Central Gov. allo- Transfers/grants Project disburse-

cations (Block Grant, CBG, ments
PSDG, Matching
Grant)

Provincial Council

DS Field offices LG Project offices

Central Government allocations and project disbursements are sometimes channelled through the Provincial
Governments. The provinces have, however limited or no say in the allocation of these funds and serve
mainly as administrative offices to the funds.

Central Government allocations

Central Government allocations are centralised, i.e. they are decided at national level and only spent at local
level. These funds are disbursed mainly through field offices of national Ministries.

Projects

Although large donor-funded projects are executed through the Provincial Governments, design and ap-
proval of project goals and activities are made at national level. This is generally seen as centralised dis-
bursement of funds.

29
Decentralised (Capital) Budget (DCB)

The DCB was established as a financing instrument for development projects that later became a tool for
members of parliament, since it is now channelled through them. Proposals submitted to or by the respective
MP in a district are discussed at the district coordinating committee. However, the MP has the last word and
defines how the funds are used. The fact that the funds are allocated by the MPs puts them between national
and local level (neither centralised nor devolved). However, in view of the electoral laws and regulations of
the country (and specifically the current situation in the Northeast) it can be said that Provincial or Local
Governments certainly do not influence the allocation of these funds.

Transfers and grants

Transfers and grants include the Block Grant, the Criteria-Based Grant, the Province-Specific Development
Grant and the Matching Grant.

Block Grant

The Block Grant is used entirely for recurrent expenditure of the Provincial Governments, i.e. personal
emoluments (80%) and other (operational) recurrent expenditure (20%). However, recurrent expenditure of
Local Governments is taken from the (provincial) Block Grant, specifically from the “other recurrent
expenditure” of the province. That means, that a portion of that 20% of the Block Grant is further divided
into all recurrent expenditure of the Local Governments in the respective province and the “other recurrent
expenditure” of the provincial administration itself. In other words, the funds available to Local
Governments (e.g. for salaries) are extremely limited.

In general it can be said that the Provincial Governments have very little manoeuvrability in terms of alloca-
tion of the Block Grant.

Criteria-Based Grant (CBG)

The CBG is meant to be used entirely for capital expenditure. The specific allocation takes place at the dis-
cretion of the provincial administration.

Province-Specific Development Grant (PSDG)

The PSDG is an additional fund that takes into account differences between provinces and tries to respond to
specific needs which are not covered by the CBG. It should be based on annual implementation programmes
(which in turn should be based on 5-year plans), but this is rarely the case.

Although largely considered to be part of the devolved budget, PSDG expenditure is not entirely left to the
Provincial Governments. The Finance Commission retains some control mechanisms, which results in a cer-
tain degree of control by the centre over this grant.

Matching Grant

The Matching Grant is a grant based on the relationship between transfers from the centre and the provinces’
self-generated resource mobilisation. It is basically an instrument to reward good performance in the genera-
tion of internal revenue. Since NEPC does not have significant self-generated income, it does not receive
any funds through this channel.

30
5.2.3 Sources of self-generated provincial revenue

The provinces have four sources of self-generated revenue:

Business turnover tax

The business turnover tax is collected by the provincial administration. It makes up to around 45-50% of
the provinces’ self-generated revenue. However, in NEP this source of income is less relevant when
compared to other provinces. This is attributed to the absence of a Provincial Council and the resulting
difficulties in collecting taxes.

Stamp duty

Stamp duty is charged on property transactions and is collected by the Registrar (Lands) at district level.
It is not entirely clear if the transfer from the district to the province takes place adequately. Stamp duty
generally accounts for around 25-30% of the provinces’ self-generated revenue.

Motor vehicle license fee

The motor vehicle license fee is another devolved tax income for the provinces. However, it is collected
by the Divisional Secretariats, which might lead to complications in terms of availability to the provin-
cial budget. This fee accounts for roughly 15% of total revenue.

Excise duty

Excise duty makes up around 2% of the provincial self-generated revenue.

In order to collect these fees, the Provincial Government has to pass a Financial Statute, basically to author-
ise itself to collect the taxes instead of the national government. If a Provincial Council cannot pass the Stat-
ute, it can submit the Statute to Parliament to be approved there. NEPC does not have a Financial Statute and
probably has not asked Parliament to pass it on the council’s behalf.

5.2.4 Expenditure

Budget estimates are rarely prepared on the basis of medium-term plans. Consequently, expenditure is sel-
domin line with development plans. In addition, the system of budget preparation separates recurrent from
capital budget: recurrent budget is determined in the Budget Department while capital budget is determined
in the Planning Department. This leads to a weak linka between recurrent and capital expenditure. The rela-
tionship between both can however be roughly estimated - at provincial level - at 85% (recurrent) to 15%
(capital), self-generated resources included. Looking at the recurrent expenditure alone, an average of 80%
of it is spent in personal emoluments, 20% in other recurrent expenses.

Monitoring of expenditure presents some difficulties. Financial monitoring is done following an accounting
system, while physical monitoring is done by observing completion of infrastructure. Impact of expenditure
is not assessed.

5.2.5 Observations on the progress of fiscal devolution

Devolved State structures are generally based on a sound division of tax income amongst the levels of gov-
ernment administration. The income of the State is distributed according to the functions assigned to each
level. In Sri Lanka, the system does not follow this reasoning. The portion of the income directly assigned to
the provinces is insufficient: “The income that can be generated by the Provinces from the sources of reve-
nue that have been assigned is not adequate to meet the expenditure requirements of the functions per-
formed. The allocation of funds from the Annual Budget is precisely to meet the resource gap of each of the
provinces” (Finance Commission, 2005). This fact is aggravated in NEP due to the absence of an elected
Provincial Council and the subsequent lack of a Financial Statute. Most sources of revenue are not accessi-
ble to NEPC.

31
The table below shows the expenditure in terms of CBG, PSDG and Matching Grant.

Table 2
Provincial capital expenditure, 2002-2004
(in Rupees)

Capital Capital expenditure

4
Province Population expenditure per capita
2003 2003 2002 2003 2004
Western 4548000 354971400 117.14 78.05 138.62
Central 2221000 452017920 246.66 203.52 282.13
Southern 2306000 574908860 378.95 249.31 327.65
North-East 2608000 445863680 278.99 170.96 173.55
North Western 2080000 502091200 273.09 241.39 303.52
North Central 1073000 368854480 524.17 343.76 460.35
Uva 1090000 437711300 454.80 401.57 414.55
Sabaragamuwa 1825000 584584000 420.01 320.32 310.87
Source: Finance Commission, 2005

Owing to lack of reliable statistical information on NEP, data from the Uva Province is often taken
as a reference to calculate poverty-related demands for NEP. However, while the Uva Province had
comparatively more funds per capita available than most provinces in the country, NEP is rather on
the lower side of the table.

The adverse situation of NEP is further aggravated by the fact that NEP is the largest province in the coun-
try, a fact that would normally be considered for additional resource allocation.

Table 3
Provinces in order of size

Province Area % of country’s

in km2 total area
North-East 18880 28.1
North Central 10475 15.5
Uva 8500 13.3
North Western 7888 12
Central 5674 8.9
Southern 5544 8.6
Sabaragamuwa 4968 7.8
Western 3684 5.7
Sri Lanka 65613 100
Source: Finance Commission, 2005

5.3 MAIN DEVELOPMENT AGENTS AT NATIONAL LEVEL

There are a great number of national ministries that play a role in development planning in NEP. The Minis-
try of Finance and Planning formulates national goals in what becomes the framework for sub-national
plans. Provincial plans should be in line with these national goals in order to be funded.

4
Includes CBG, PSDG and Matching Grant

32
The Ministry of Nation Building and Development (formerly “Ministry of RRR”) is of paramount impor-
tance due to the finances that are channelled through it from various sources, mainly donor funds. It is there-
fore a key ministry regarding development activities in NEP.

The Ministry of Provincial Councils and Local Government is supposed to have a supporting role in the es-
tablishment of fully operational provincial and local administrations. This support also includes planning
matters. The ministry, however, understands its role mainly in the provision of funds for provincial and local
functions. The Sri Lanka Institute of Local Government (SLILG) comes under the supervision of this minis-
try. SLILG works, as the names indicates, on matters related to local governments, which makes it an inter-
esting partner for NEPC, especially after the recent election of local councillors.

The Ministry of Regional Development is mandated to manage all large development projects in the country.
The term “regional” is related to the size of the projects the ministry manages, and not because it has respon-
sibilities towards all regions, i.e. provinces. However, the ministry does not have any working relationship
with NEP due to the conflict situation.

Although not a ministry, the Finance Commission plays a decisive role in the context of allocation of funds
from national to provincial level. The Finance Commission, an institution anchored in the Constitution,
guides the Treasury in formula definition for annual transfers. The Treasury, however, is not bound by the
formula and the advice of the Finance Commission.

The list of ministries relevant to development planning in NEP includes many more which are not mentioned
above. This not only refers to sector ministries, but also and especially to very peculiar ministries which
seem to be created to accommodate very particular interests at national level. One factor that contributes to
the large number of ministries is the fact that the periodic reallocation of ministry portfolios (latest after a
presidential or parliamentary election) results not only in new ministries of all kinds but often in “survivors”
among old ministries that nobody seems to bother about. Although the present government campaigned for a
reduction in the large number of ministries established under the previous regime, today the cabinet shows
no significant difference in terms of number of ministries when compared to the previous set-up.

Two important agents in terms of broader development planning are the National Physical Planning Depart-
ment and the Urban Development Authority. Owing to their focus on physical development, they cut across
sectors, since their approach to planning is the physical expression of all sectoral planning in concrete terms,
on the ground. The relationship between these two organisations and the Provincial Planning Secretariat is
very weak.

In the case of National Physical Planning Department the relationship is difficult because the department
does not have any sub-national structures, at least not operational ones. Their only office is located in the
ministry in Colombo. Urban Development Authority has various offices in the Northeast, with two main of-
fices (Jaffna and Trincomalee) and some sub-offices in other districts. Their focus is however on specific
urban areas and not the region as a whole, which makes a working relationship with Provincial Planning Se-
cretariat not necessarily essential. Nevertheless, these two are the most important agents in terms of physical
planning. Intensifying the working relationship between them would benefit all sides.

National Physical Planning Department prepares regional/provincial plans on behalf of the Regional Plan-
ning Committees (i.e. the provincial authorities). The understanding is that the central organisation will con-
tinue doing so as long as the provincial administration is not in a position to technically carry out the func-
tion. This understanding and present arrangement is perfectly justifiable. However, the question that remains
unresolved is how the provincial administrations will ever develop the capacity to carry out this function,
unless the national department starts actively transferring knowledge and skills. For this to happen, NEPC
and specifically Planning Secretariat should take the initiative and suggest activities targeting this transfer of
knowledge.

The Urban Development Authority (UDA) has an indirect relationship with NEPC and Planning Secretariat
through its interventions at Local Government level. UDA prepares local physical development plans for
selected areas. According to the law, it is the minister (national level) who determines those areas. However,
in practice the local authorities can request UDA to prepare such plans for their areas of jurisdiction. While

33
this is a generally positive arrangement, political interference has led to having UDA working on low prior-
ity areas, owing to the interest of influential politicians, usually MPs or ministers. Further, it not only inter-
feres negatively with processes of prioritisation, but also shows the negative consequences of not having
clearly defined criteria for the selection of such areas of intervention for UDA (as would be, e.g., population,
size of the urban area, growth rate, economic potentials, etc.). Here, Provincial Planning Secretariat could
play an important role by defining such criteria for NEP and agreeing with UDA on a plan of interventions.
The basis for such criteria is already provided for in the Eastern Province Physical Plan, although only for
part of the entire NEP.

5.4 MAIN DEVELOPMENT AGENTS AT PROVINCIAL LEVEL

At provincial level, there are basically four groups of organisations which have significant impact in devel-
opment and development planning:

• Provincial Government (with its provincial ministries, departments and other units)
• Offices of national ministries at provincial level
• Donor-funded projects
• LTTE/PDS (Planning and Development Secretariat)

Other development agents usually have smaller areas of intervention, rarely the entire province.

5.4.1 Provincial Government

“North-East Provincial Council (NEPC) is the government at provincial level.” This would be the under-
standing under “normal” circumstances, but, as mentioned earlier, Central Government structures undermine
the real devolution of powers to sub-national levels. In addition, due to the ethnic conflict, the President, in
line with powers granted to him in the Constitution, dissolved the council in NEP in 1989. Elections to es-
tablish a new council have been postponed since then.

The term North-East Provincial Council is still used to refer to the Provincial Government, although what
we have at provincial level is the secretariat to the council, i.e. the administrative arm of the Provincial Gov-
ernment, and the Governor, who adopts the role of the council in its absence. To avoid confusion, we will
use NEPC as is the common practice.

NEPC, like all other Provincial Governments in Sri Lanka, is allowed to establish a maximum of five pro-
vincial ministries. This is a further indication of the double standards applied by the centre. In a devolved
system the province should have similar flexibility to determine the number of provincial ministries needed
as is the case at national level. In view of the devolved functions, NEPC has established ministries that com-
bine very different sectors which usually would form individual ministries. Furthermore, some key units do
not have the rank of a ministry for the same reason, as is the case with the Provincial Planning Secretariat.

The five provincial ministries in NEP are:

• Agriculture, Lands, Livestock Development, Irrigation and Fisheries

• Education, Cultural Affaires, Sports and Youth Affaires
• Health and Indigenous Medicine
• Rehabilitation, Reconstruction, Social Welfare and Buildings
• Provincial Public Administration, Local Government, Co-operative Development, Road Develop-
ment, Rural Development, Industries, and Management Development & Training

Some units are incorporated under the Chief Secretary’s Office:

• Treasury (including Motor Traffic)

• Planning Secretariat (including the Centre for Information Resources Management)
• Engineering Services and Infrastructure

34
 • Legal Unit

Finally, at the top of the provincial administration set-up are the Governor and his secretariat, which includes
the provincial audit department and a legal unit, among others.

It must be mentioned that the five provincial ministries do not necessarily represent sectors that have been
entirely devolved to the provinces. The reason behind this is twofold: many functions fall under the concur-
rent functions, as defined in the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, i.e. functions that are the respon-
sibility of both national and provincial level. At the same time, many functions have not been allocated en-
tirely to either national or provincial level, but have been divided between them. So, certain areas of a sector
might have been allocated to the national level, and other areas of the same sector to the provincial level (re-
served and provincial lists), or some areas of a sector to the provincial level and other areas of the same sec-
tor to the concurrent functions (provincial and concurrent lists). We can conclude that in addition to the in-
herit difficulties that the presence of a concurrent list carries with it, the lack of rules and mechanisms to
regulate the exercise of powers of the list (the “rules of the game”) aggravates the situation. An example of
such an institutional arrangement would be a second chamber in Parliament.

The partly artificial combination of sectors into one single ministry (most notably in the Ministry of Public
Administration, Local Government, Co-operative Development, Road Development, Rural Development,
Industries, and Management Development & Training) is made easier by the division into provincial de-
partments. We would therefore rather refer to the departments for reasons of clarity.

Each department has a planning section to formulate sectoral plans. All sectoral plans are collected at the
Planning Secretariat, where provincial plans of varied nature are compiled (e.g. Five Year Investment Pro-
gramme, Medium Term Rolling Plan, Annual Implementation Programme, etc.). Unfortunately, the planning
sections are too often very weak, which results in delayed or sub-standard plans, which eventually results in
sub-standard (compiled) provincial plans.

The problem has to be tackled if comprehensive provincial planning is to be achieved. The planning units in
the departments have to be strengthened through capacity building of the human resources and improvement
of the data and information systems within the departments, as well as between the departments and the
Planning Secretariat (standardised formats, information flow, etc.). The Provincial Planning Committee
(which meets quarterly for a period of time which is definitely insufficient) could be reorganised to improve
coordination mechanisms between departments and Planning Secretariat, as well as among the departments.
The lack of adequate coordination and discussions between all these development agents is one of the main
obstacles to the formulation of comprehensive provincial development plans. A similar approach should be
attempted to improve coordination between levels of government (province, district, local).

In general, the role of the Planning Secretariat has to be strengthened to transform it into the main agent for
coordination and communication between departments and between levels. Simultaneously, processes have
to be institutionalised. Both the Planning Secretariat and departments complain about the information flow,
although in different ways. While the departments complain that the Planning Secretariat burdens their work
through frequent but irregular requests for data and information, the Planning Secretariat criticises the poor
level of cooperation they receive from the departments.

In summary, we see three main areas that need to be addressed within the Provincial Government (and at
sub-provincial level) to improve planning processes:

• Institutionalisation, standardisation and automation of processes

• Capacity building in planning units of departments
• Establishment of more and qualitatively improved spaces for discussion of various issues related to
planning

A fourth main area of intervention is the Planning Secretariat itself. Owing to the importance of the Planning
Secretariat in the context and focus of attention of this analysis, we deal with it in a separate section below.

35
5.4.2 Offices of national ministries at provincial level

As explained earlier, the Provincial Government does not include all sectors of government but only those
specified in the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. As a consequence, sectors that do not fall under
the area of competency of the Provincial Government have separate offices at provincial level or by-pass the
provincial level completely and have their branches at district level. Further, functions that are jointly carried
out by national and provincial level (based on the list of concurrent functions) are split between these two
levels in different ways. In some cases there are two completely separated ministries, in other cases there are
ministries with internal separations into national and provincial functions. The diversity of arrangements
among the various ministries makes it very difficult for outsiders to the system (and in many cases insiders
as well) to orient themselves.

This is however not specific to the NEP: “There is neither mandate nor authority that requires these offices
of the line departments operating in the province to report to Southern Provincial Council”. “Each central
government line department and its branch offices in the province is controlled by their Colombo headquar-
ters with direct upwards and downwards reporting function” (ADB, 1998).

In the context of planning, we would like to highlight one central department present at provincial level
which is of special importance: the Surveys Department. NEPC does not have any role in surveying matters
and consequently depends on this department. For planning purposes, the role of the department and the ser-
vices it can provide (surveying and mapping) are fundamental. Close relations with Provincial Planning Se-
cretariat would be desirable.

5.4.3 Selected donor-funded projects

Donor-funded projects play a predominant role in development activities in the province owing to their fi-
nancial strength. Being donor-funded, all projects are initially discussed and agreed on at national level.
Various ministries act as counterparts to the donor agencies (e.g. UNDP, ADB, World Bank, etc.) and other
development partners (e.g. GTZ, JICA, etc.). The Provincial Government comes in as executing agent of the
projects. Within the Provincial Government, the Planning Secretariat has the role of monitoring the progress
of the projects and reporting to the national ministries.

Most donor-funded projects do not have the entire province as their area of intervention. For instance, tsu-
nami-related projects focus on coastal areas. Nevertheless, they work across districts and therefore have a
provincial dimension.

It is not possible to analyse all the projects in the context of this report. However, it is important to under-
stand the role they play and the structures they usually establish to operate, as well as their linkage to the
formal government structure (national and provincial). Mostly, a project has its head office at provincial
level and several offices at district level. Beyond district level, the projects work through the Divisional Sec-
retariats or directly through other governmental, non-governmental or even community based organisations.

• North-East Irrigated Agriculture Project (NEIAP)

• North-East Community Restoration and Development (NECORD)
• North-East Emergency Reconstruction Programme (NEERP)
• North-East Coastal Community Development Project (NECCDEP)
• North-East Housing Reconstruction Programme (NEHRP)
• Sri Lanka Affected Areas Recovery and Take-off Project (STAART)
• Community Water Supply and Sanitation Project (CWSSP)
• Conflict Affected Area Rehabilitation Project (CAARP)
• Tsunami Affected Area Rebuilding Project (TAARP)

5.4.4 The LTTE and its Planning and Development Secretariat

LTTE plays a very important role in the planning and implementation of activities in the entire NEP. Its
Planning and Development Secretariat (PDS) tries to formulate visions and guidelines for development in

36
general, claiming the need of “northeast-borne” concepts for the region in view of vested interests behind
plans and interventions designed in Colombo. It also influences activities from other development agents by
signalling approval or disapproval to them. The Provincial Government regularly coordinates its activities
with LTTE/PDS – in fact, it does so on behalf of Central Government following a directive issued by the
Prime Minister after the signing of the 2002 cease-fire agreement.

At district and local level, the degree of influence of LTTE varies, depending on the specific area (govern-
ment-controlled area – LTTE-controlled area). Usually, LTTE would have similar structures to the ones
from Central Government, in direct response and opposition to the national set-up. For example, interven-
tions at local level need the approval from a counterpiece to the government agent when these take place in
LTTE-controlled areas.

The technical guidance from PDS however suffers from insufficient human resources to really be a strong
leader in development planning issues. It is against this background that PDS supports (at least at the mo-
ment) the strengthening of the Provincial Government. A strong Provincial Government would be in a posi-
tion to formulate visions and guidelines in the interest of the region’s population.

In the meantime, PDS is an important partner in planning processes and should be involved like any other
stakeholder. From a pragmatic point of view, not involving PDS would simply jeopardise any development
intervention, as would be the case by ignoring any other important development agent in NEP. Furthermore,
in view of the directive issued by the Prime Minister in 2002 (to all public servants, but especially directed
to the government agents in NEP) regular consultations with the LTTE regarding any development activities
in the province is essential. Although the conflict has worsened since then, the directive has never been re-
voked.

5.5 PROVINCIAL PLANNING SECRETARIAT

The Provincial Planning Secretariat has changed institutionally several times since its creation as part of the
provincial “Ministry of Planning, Youth Affaires, Human Resource Development and Women Affaires” at
the time of the establishment of the North-East Provincial Council. Today, the Provincial Planning Secre-
tariat comes under the direct purview of the Chief Secretary’s Office.

5.5.1 Objectives and functions

The mission of the Planning Secretariat is to establish and sustain a dynamic provincial planning process in
the provincial council. Five objectives were defined in this context:

To install a provincial planning process and reorganise planning system within the province
To develop planning capabilities at all levels of administration
To formulate strategies to restructure the provincial economy to accelerate growth, expand non-farm
activities in rural areas, maximise provincial resources utilisation, and create the right environment
for private sector expansion
To install a total information resource management system for planning and management taking ad-
vantage of modern technology
To realise the full benefit of the development and restructuring efforts to the people via implementing
suitable plans and programmes

The objectives are accompanied by a long list of functions, many of which are currently not or only partially
being carried out. An attempt to portray the situation regarding functions and actual work could be summa-
rised as shown in the table below. We have differentiated between opinions of PPS staff regarding the func-
tions they are carrying out and our observations of the same.

37
 Table 4
Functions at Provincial Planning Secretariat and actual implementation

Function Being carried out Remarks

Fully Partially Not
at all
1 Assisting Provincial Planning Council in matters pertaining to provincial x 1)
planning
2 Performing secretarial functions of Provincial Planning Committee x
3 Attending to matters pertaining to provincial development policy and strat- x o 2)
egy
4 Preparing medium-term rolling plan and annual implementation pro- x
gramme
5 Setting overall guidelines and strategies and coordination of divisional x o 3)
development plans, sectoral plans and other operational plans
6 Installing and maintaining a planning information system and operations x o 4)
room
7 Creating, updating and maintaining database for provincial development x 5)
planning
8 Undertaking surveys, investigations and studies connected to provincial x o 6)
economic development
9 Coordination of major development projects x o 7)
10 Formulating training programmes to build up planning capabilities x o 8)
11 Coordination of major donor-funded projects x o 9)
12 Progress control of all capital investment programmes under devolved x
subjects
13 Monitoring progress of public and private sector investment programmes 10)
within the province
14 Coordinating activities pertaining to industrial promotion, agriculture de- x o 11)
velopment strategy, fisheries development, environmental issues, and
transport
15 Attending to matters pertaining to human resource development and man x 12)
power
16 Formulating provincial nutritional plans and programmes x 13)
17 Evaluating the performance of institutions and enterprises engaged in x
economic activities
18 Assisting Chief Secretary in planning development activities and negotia- x
tions for funding projects
19 Attending to matters pertaining to banking and financial institutions in rela- x
tion to provincial development
20 Giving publicity on implementation of programmes and achievements x
21 Developing an information resource management system of the NEPC x

Remarks:

x As perceived by PPS staff

o As observed by CIM Experts

1) At present the Provincial Planning Council is not operational

2) The (erroneous) understanding is that in the absence of a Council, the administration cannot formulate policies and strategies
3) “Coordination” is understood at PPS (and in general) in a very superficial way. The compilation of various sectoral and sub-
provincial plans is seen as coordination. Coordination meetings do not serve as spaces to discuss things but to report and re-
ceive “directions”
4) This function must be seen as ongoing
5) A database is available but it is not adequate
6) The last study took place in 1993. PPS gives lack of resources as reason. In eality this activity is not taking place
7) PPS sees this as a function of the sectors, where most large projects are located. The PPS role is therefore limited
8) PPS does carry out the function, but due to its relevance we feel that much more would need to be done
9) See 3)
10) It is not clear what this function entails
11) PPS staff feels that this function is not being carried out adequately. Proper coordination is probably not taking place at all
12) It is not clear what this function entails
13) It is not clear why this function should be with PPS

The reasons for not carrying out many of the functions vary considerably. In most cases the simple absence
of qualified staff makes it impossible to assume certain functions. Inadequate equipment and facilities might

38
explain why certain other functions are not carried out. In specific cases, the functions defined are not rele-
vant under current circumstances. Finally, some functions are given a low priority.

5.5.2 Organisational structure

In terms of the organisational structure, it seems to be very difficult for Planning Secretariat staff to differen-
tiate between an organisational structure that corresponds to the defined functions and one that reflects the
current staff available. The organisational structure is something that is changed constantly to match the per-
sons and their areas of work. This is certainly one factor that contributes to the large number of functions
which are not being carried out: they do not appear as gaps in the organisational structure of the Planning
Secretariat (i.e. not staffed units).

Given this difficulty, it is not possible to get a response to the question regarding the “should-be” organisa-
tional structure of the Planning Secretariat. Since it has never functioned with fully-fledged staff, an optimal
organogramme has never really existed. A simplified organogramme as perceived by PPS staff is shown be-
low.

Figure 7
Provincial Planning Secretariat: “perceived” organisational structure (organogramme)

Chief Secretary
NEPC

Deputy Chief
Secretary
Planning

Statistical unit IT and donor-funded Medium-term plans, Planning, monitoring

projects unit trainings and sectoral and progress review
development unit unit Administration unit

Typing pool Accounting Establishment

From the organogramme above it is clear that the Planning Secretariat does not have a functional organisa-
tional structure, or if it does, then its staff does not know it. The organogramme corresponds to the persons
working at PPS at a given time, and their activities; it is amended regularly to reflect the current staff. The
lack of an institutionalised organisational structure might partly explain why some functions are not being
carried out, since they do not appear in the organogramme.

In contrast to the above, we assume that the organisational structure originally designed (or envisaged) for
the Planning Secretariat would probably look as follows.

39
 Figure 8
Provincial Planning Secretariat: “functional” organisational structure (organogramme)

HEAD
Deputy Chief Secretary
Planning

ADMINISTRATION PROJECT (CIRM)

Director Director

PLANNING
Deputy Directors

SYSTEMS + TRAININGS STRATEGIES INFORMA- PLAN IM-

PROCESSES Assistant + PLANS TION SYS- PLEMENTA-
Assistant Di- Directors Assistant TEM TION
rectors Directors Assistant Assistant
Directors Directors

ESTABLISH- ACCOUNTS Management Management Management Management Management

MENT Management Assistants, Assistants, Assistants, Assistants, Assistants,
Management Assistants, OES OES OES OES OES
Assistants, OES
Driver,
Watcher, OES

The Planning Secretariat is headed by a Deputy Chief Secretary Planning, who is directly answerable to the
Chief Secretary. The entire approved cadre and the positions currently filled are shown in the table below.

Table 5
Staff at Provincial Planning Secretariat as of 5th April 2006

Post Approved Posts Actually

cadre filled At PPS
Deputy Chief Secretary 1 1 Part-time
Director 1 1 1
Deputy Director 2 4 4
Assistant Director 12 0 0
Administrative Officer 1 0 0
Data Processing Officer 1 0 0
Statistical Officer 1 0 0
Development Assistants 1 1 1
Management Assistants 5 19 11 6 4
Data Entry Operator 1 3 3
Drivers 2 27 1
Office Employee Service 4 68 4
Total cadre 45 21 18
Special cadre scheme: Programme Assistants n.a. 13 9 10
Seconded by Finance Commission: Assistant Research Officer n.a. 1 1
Seconded by Centre for International Migration and Development n.a. 2 2
(Germany): Planning Experts
Total staff n.a. 37 31

5
Includes the former categories General Clerical Service, Stenographer and Typist
6
Out of these, 7 have been seconded to other units
7
Out of these 2, 1 is seconded to NECCDEP
8
Out of these 6, 1 is seconded to Chief Secretary’s Office and 1 retires in May
9
Out of these 13, 2 have been seconded to NECCDEP and 1 is undergoing a 14-month training

40
In terms of personnel, the main shortcomings are found in the higher and medium levels of the organisa-
tional structure. The lack of a full-time Deputy Chief Secretary Planning and the absence of 12 Assistant
Directors are the main areas of concern.

5.5.3 Organisational environment

An organisational analysis workshop we conducted in March 2006 produced some very interesting results in
terms of the way PPS sees itself. Some of the self-reflections are listed below:

Medium rank PPS staff considers the organisation to be a “learning organisation”, where working
relationships are rather flat, without the strict hierarchical structures of other organisations, and where
the flow of information, both horizontally and vertically, is considered adequate, as are teamwork and
communication in general. Critical thinking is possible and issues are discussed.

Most problems regarding functions that PPS is not carrying out are related to staffing shortages or exter-
nal factors. Some of the external factors mentioned are:

• Constant policy changes of Central Government

• Ad hoc activities that need to be carried out, mostly from central ministries and the Chief Secre-
tary’s Office
• Little coordination interest from central ministries (all levels)
• Interference from PDS (LTTE)
• Inadequate support from provincial sectoral heads
• “Parachuted” programmes (national programmes, donor agencies)
• Poor NGO coordination due to lack of a system for that purpose
• Insufficient knowledge at local level (capacity of staff)
• Insufficient participation of the grassroots in design and implementation of activities
• Disparities in the utilisation of resources

This image PPS has of itself is not in accordance with the image we would have of a “learning and dynamic
PPS”. Hierarchies do play a very important role and real teamwork is understood in a very different way
from the “western concept”. Going through the hierarchical levels at PPS, each level considers itself partici-
patory regarding work among staff from the same level, as well as in its relationship with the lower ranks.
However, when asked separately, the next lower level refutes the notion of an apparently flat structure, em-
phasising the strong barriers between levels above. The issue of hierarchies is - in our view - an important
impediment to achieving a working atmosphere that promotes initiative, critical thinking and open exchange
of ideas. Specific meetings to systematically and deeply reflect on their own organisation do not really take
place.

Coordination, as mentioned earlier, is not fully understood. Coordination is not carried out as a process
where various individual actions are brought together to discuss them in view of their interrelationships and
broader context. Harmonisation of different actions to achieve common objectives is reduced to communi-
cating and compiling. Coordination spaces rarely serve for real coordination but usually for mere informa-
tion sharing.

Most of the activities currently taking place at PPS could be carried out in a much more efficient and effec-
tive way. Many of these activities should be automated, others delegated. This would in turn liberate some
time at higher and medium ranks for more substantial activities, such as formulation of overall goals and
strategies for provincial development.

The design and installation of a comprehensive databank and information system for planning purposes at all
relevant units is crucial. This involves primarily the planning units at local level (divisions and Local Gov-
ernments) and district level, the PPS itself, and planning units in the departments. Most of the information
required at PPS for the production of various documents should be available at all times in digital form, be-
ing maintained regularly with information submitted from all other planning units mentioned above. Cur-
rently, the production of any document triggers a landslide of bureaucratic procedures to get the information

41
from the sectors or other planning offices. If organised adequately, the production of most documents would
be a task for junior employees at PPS.

Another exercise during the organisational analysis workshop was the drawing of a mind map of the institu-
tional environment of the Planning Secretariat. PPS staff identified organisations which are relevant to their
work and defined the kind of relationship between PPS and these organisations. Some of the results are in-
teresting since they throw more light on the perception PPS staff have of the role and position of their own
organisation. The main results are shown in the figure below and are commented on afterwards.

Figure 9
Mind map of the institutional landscape of Provincial Planning Secretariat

Donor
Sectoral / agencies Coordinat-
line minis- ing commit-
Executing tries tees
agencies

Provincial
Treasury
Implementing agen-
cies (prov. ministries, PPS
District Secretariats)

INGOs,
NGOs
Associa-
tions, CBOs
Local
authorities

Beneficiar- Governor Politicians

ies

Key

Conceptual inputs / Design inputs / Guidance

Resource inputs

Output / Service delivery (defined, but not used in the figure)

Coordination

Reporting

Communication / Information sharing

Feedback (defined, but not used in the figure)

Transfer of responsibilities

Regulation and control

Not defined (but used in the figure)

42
Comments

One of the categories defined to describe the relationship between organisations was “output/service deliv-
ery”. This category was defined as one of the first, indicating that it is considered important. However, when
drawing the image no such relationship was established. This is a clear indication of the way PPS is per-
ceived by its staff, which is definitely not as a service provider. Similarly, the category “feedback” does not
appear in the figure, although defined as a type of relationship. This could possibly be an indication of the
fact that feedback does indeed not take place, or at least it is not seen as important, therefore not identified in
the figure.

The Office of the Chief Secretary NEPC does not appear in the figure either, although this office is the direct
superior to PPS. This is probably the result of the strong link between PPS and the person of the Chief
Secretary, who was previously head of PPS. Although a strong relationship would be quite positive, it has a
negative impact in so far as PPS cannot develop a profile of its own due to the excessively strong presence
of the Chief Secretary, coupled with the absence of a full-time Deputy Chief Secretary (Planning).

Another interesting absence is the one regarding organisations at national level. From our observations we
know that a significant amount of work at PPS is dedicated to responding to demands from national level
organisations. Why they do not appear in the figure is unclear. Similarly, the private sector does not appear
in the picture, although this has a clearer explanation: PPS and NEPC in general have not really internalised
the importance of the private sector for development.

In contrast to the above, the category “politicians” was identified, although at the time of the exercise there
were no politicians elected to local or provincial councils in NEP (save irrelevant exceptions). The politi-
cians referred to could be only Members of Parliament and national Ministers. One of the reasons for includ-
ing this category might be the feeling that the absence of provincial politicians (or rather elected representa-
tives at provincial level) is a strong hindrance to the proper functioning of PPS. Although this might be oc-
casionally the case, we are of the view that this void is exaggerated and often used to excuse inactivity on
the part of the administrative side of the Provincial Government, including PPS. Interestingly, it is between
PPS and the (absent) politicians that we find one of the only two cases were the relationship (arrow) goes in
both directions. The other only case is the reporting between PPS and the Treasury. This apparently minor
detail has however a significant background, since it accurately symbolises how relationships are mostly
seen in NEPC: vertical, in one direction, mainly in the sense of commands and seldom as exchange.

Out of the thirteen organisations identified (including PPS itself), “coordination” (defined as another cate-
gory of relationship) only takes place between PPS and three of the other organisations or groups of organi-
sations: Provincial Treasury, implementing agencies (provincial ministries/departments and District Secre-
tariats) and coordinating committees (although this last one is not really an organisation). Further, the arrows
that determine a specific direction in the relationship were not drawn in both directions, which is something
you would expect regarding coordination.

The relationship between PPS and INGOs and NGOs was shown without further explanations. It is an un-
clear relationship. Although we do not know why the relationship with INGOs is unclear, we know that the
relationship with NGOs is an uneasy one. A possible explanation for this might be the perception at PPS (as
a governmental organisation) that NGOs exist because of the incapacity of governmental organisations to
address issues of concern to the population, which is true to a certain extent. This correct but negative appre-
ciation of NGOs is not unique to PPS, NEP or Sri Lanka. As in other countries, it results in a difficult rela-
tionship between government and NGOs.

It is interesting to note a few things regarding the last two categories “transfer of responsibilities” and “regu-
lation and control”. First, they do not appear in relationship to PPS. A possible interpretation would be that
PPS sees itself as an organisation which does not transfer responsibilities and does not control and regulate
other organisations. Further, it is not an organisation which is receipient of transferred responsibilities, and is
not controlled and regulated by other organisations. We think that this perception is wrong and is probably
explained by the fact that these categories are somewhat stigmatised as negative. Both categories appear in
the figure, but only between other organisations.

43
Regarding the above-mentioned categories “transfer of responsibilities” and “regulation and control”, there
are further noteworthy observations. “Regulation and control” emanates from only one organisation: the lo-
cal authorities. The statement made at PPS is that the local authorities regulate and control the activities of
implementing agencies (provincial ministries and District Secretariats), INGOs, NGOs and the beneficiaries.
This statement is simply wrong. The reality on the ground could not be more different. This statement can be
either interpreted as the drawing of a “desired situation” or as poor understanding of the situation on the
ground. Further, the fact that local authorities are seen as organisations that regulate and control as opposed
to provide services is worrisome, but not surprising. It reflects the unfortunate understanding that govern-
mental organisations are not there to serve the people but to rule over the people.

5.5.4 Other observations

As mentioned earlier, development planning - understood in an integrated and strategic way - is not being
carried out amongst the development agents in NEP, including Planning Secretariat. “Plans” are not docu-
ments based on situational analysis and strategic prioritisation, but rather compilations of various activities.
Inter-sectoral linkages are not identified, regional potentials are not exploited and inner-provincial differ-
ences are not objectively considered.

The fact that there is not a single, comprehensive and properly integrated (not just compiled) development
plan has as a consequence the existence and utilisation of uncoordinated plans. Sectoral plans are not
amended according to general provincial priorities; at most they are adjusted to budgetary ceilings and pri-
orities set in Colombo. Line ministries play a stronger role than what should be the case. Provincial minis-
tries often understand themselves as implementers of national policies, not at all as devolved and therefore
semi-autonomous ministries. District, divisional and Local Government plans follow prioritisation of their
own and cannot be in line with provincial priorities because such priorities are not formulated in a
comprehensive integral provincial development plan. Donor-funded projects are not coordinated because
there is no provincial formulated provincial vision to coordinate them with.

The need for Planning Secretariat to prepare a provincial development plan, not an investment plan or a
compilation of sectoral and sub-provincial plans, is of paramount importance.

5.5.5 Conclusions

The Provincial Planning Secretariat is one of the key organisations of NEPC. It is however not playing the
important role it should be playing. This has both external and internal factors. The image of PPS and the
relationships with other organisations has to improve. Automation of information flow, especially to PPS,
has to be prioritised. The functions of PPS should be reviewed, as well as the corresponding internal organ-
isational arrangements (organisational structure). Staffing is an issue which needs to be tackled. Key posi-
tions have to be filled.

5.6 MAIN DEVELOPMENT AGENTS AT DISTRICT LEVEL

5.6.1 District administration

The Central Government structure of the district and Grama Niladhari system is a carry-over from British
colonial times into the modern Sri Lankan State. The divisional level was integrated in this structure only
after independence. From a legal point of view, the districts have a fairly weak position, being only men-
tioned in the Constitution (Article 5) and named in the First Schedule, as well as in the Administrative Dis-
tricts Act (1955), where the areas of jurisdiction of Government Agents are specified. Their function and
mandate, however, is not detailed therein. “The District Secretary represents smaller line departments with
non-devolved responsibilities in the district” (ADB, 1998). The District Secretariat has therefore limited re-
sponsibilities, which not only exclude devolved functions but also some of the central functions. In reality,
however, the power of the head of the district administration (District Secretary / Government Agent) goes
far beyond this legal responsibility.

44
The districts comprise an intermediate level in the Sri Lankan administrative system. Administration at this
level performs reserved subjects and coordinates national programmes and projects. A powerful District Sec-
retary, commonly still referred to as Government Agent, heads the District Secretariat – also called Kach-
cheri. District Secretaries thus derive their power directly from the Central Government.

The provincial administration does not have a proper equivalent at district level. At this level, eight (Re-
gional) Assistant Commissioners of Local Government (R/ACLG) have the function of guiding and assisting
the relationship between NEPC and local authorities. Currently, the provincial administration is strengthen-
ing the ACLG offices in an attempt to offer better support to the Local Governments.

5.6.2 Planning at district level

In principle, the district administrations carry out functions as a sub-provincial but inter-divisional planning
office, across Divisional Secretariat and Local Government areas. Planning activities at district level are
largely confined to coordination and monitoring of all projects and programmes in the area. Actual planning
processes and implementation were decentralised to the Divisional Secretariats. Thus the planning branch in
Vavuniya, for example, has three Assistant Directors Planning who come directly under the Deputy Director
Planning, while there is a cadre of four Assistant Directors Planning, one for each division (see figure be-
low). The linkage between district and division is very strong, at least regarding planning.

The Central Government appears to maintain a direct link to the planning branches of the districts through a
line ministry (see figure below). With the change of government in November 2005, the Ministry of Rural
Livelihoods Development became the line ministry for all planning units. This seems to be the typical struc-
ture, showing that in theory each national ministry can exert its power at district level without the Govern-
ment Agent, as he is not the head of all sectors. Thus the office of the GA remains a structurally more or less
separate but in practice influential coordinating and decision-making entity.

Usually, the GA/District Secretary oversees all development activities in the district, including Central Gov-
ernment activities, provincial functions and to some extent non-governmental projects. The District Secretar-
ies function as the ‘outposts’ of the Central Government. The district administration is responsible for back-
stopping and coordinating implementation of activities assigned to them by both the provincial administra-
tion as well as the Central Government. Thus the District Secretary plays the role of coordinator, linking the
activities of central and provincial administrations. Since the GA supervises the Divisional Secretariats, he
has a certain influence over other activities as well. In reality, most of the provincial functions and activities
at local level are executed and implemented by the Divisional Secretariats. The relationship of GA and the
province is therefore complicated, since lines of command and responsibilities are not clearly defined. It
comes down eventually to personal attitudes of the individuals whether it is a conciliatory or a more conflict-
ing relationship.

Several committees build up an important institution in the districts. Among these, the District Coordinating
Committee (DCC) is central as an advisory body to the districts. It is chaired by an MP appointed by the
President with the GA acting as secretary. According to NEPC Planning Procedures, the DCC assembles all
provincial ministers (not in place in NEPC), all provincial council members of the district (not in place in
NEPC), and all the chairpersons of local authorities within the respective district. It is the major decision-
making body in the district, sanctioning all development projects and programmes. The District Develop-
ment Committee (DDC) is the body mandated to approve activities and allocation of funds in the district. It
is called monthly or bi-monthly and in most cases is chaired by the same person as the DCC. The main task
of the committee is to allocate the decentralised budget of Rs.5 million available to every MP. Hence all the
MPs from the district take part. There are other committees, e.g. sectoral committees, which are of less rele-
vance for the overall planning process.

In most cases, the committees and MPs set allocation priorities. It is also in these committees, particularly in
District Coordinating Committee and District Development Committee, where there is an opportunity for
collaboration between the Local Government authorities and district planning.

It is also to be noted that a number of parastatal, semi-autonomous agencies form part of the district level
planning structure as they have offices in the districts. Some of them are Central Government bodies such as

45
the Urban Development Authority (UDA), Central Environmental Authority (CEA) and National Housing
Development Authority (NHDA). Their impact will be described in more detail below (local level).

5.6.3 Selected donor-funded projects

• Development and Rehabilitation of Batticaloa (DERBA)

• Technical Cooperation Project for Agricultural and Rural Development for Rehabilitation and Re-
construction through Community Approach in Trincomalee (TRINCAP)
• Mannar District Rehabilitation and Reconstruction through Community Approach (MANRECAP)

46
 Figure 10
District Planning Office, Vavuniya: Organisation Chart
Source: District Secretariat with own amendments

Ministry of
Rural Livelihoods Development
national level
(Line Ministry for all planning branches)

District Secretariat
Government Agent/Distr. Secretary district level

District Planning Office

Deputy Director Planning

Divisional Secretariat
Assist. Director Assist. Director Assist. Director Divisional Secretary
Planning - I Planning - II Planning - III

local level

Administration (6) Development

Officers (5) Venchala Vavuniya Vavuniya
Cheddikuloam Vavuniya South North

Assist. Director Assist. Director Assist. Director Assist. Director

Planning (1) Planning (1) Planning (1) Planning (1)

Development Development Development Development

Officer (2) Officer (2) Officer (2) Officer (2)

47
5.7 MAIN DEVELOPMENT AGENTS AT LOCAL LEVEL

5.7.1 Administration at local level

A dual administration is the salient feature at the local level. On the one hand there is the Divisional Secre-
tariat under the Central Government, and on the other hand the Local Government under the Provincial
Government. The latter comprise Municipal Councils, Urban Councils and Pradeshiya Sabhas. They are un-
der supervision of the Department of Local Government, as one of the devolved subjects specified in the 13th
Amendment to the Constitution.

Following the Amendment, Pradeshiya Sabhas were created at the level of the former AGA divisions (Divi-
sional Secretariats), directly under the control of the Provincial Councils. However, most power at local
level still rests with the Central Government. Even though the Pradeshiya Sabhas were established to carry
out devolved functions of the Provincial Councils, the bureaucratic/administrative machinery that facilitates
such functions is in the office of the Divisional Secretary (DS). The DS was initially envisaged to function
as the secretary of the Pradeshiya Sabha. But they refused to carry out functions under an elected local body,
which they considered was not on par with the professional standard of the Divisional Secretariat, which
employs officers of the Sri Lanka Administrative Service (Development Studies Institute, University of Co-
lombo and South Asia Institute University of Heidelberg, 2003).

Originally, a Commissioner of Local Government at national level handled all administrative functions in
respect of the local authorities. Now the provincial Commissioner of Local Government carries out these
functions. The Department of Local Government, North-East Province, was formed in 1989. Presently it
comes under the Provincial Ministry of Public Administration, Local Government, Cooperatives, Rural De-
velopment, Road Development, Industries and Training. The objective of the Department of Local Govern-
ment is to guide, assist and supervise the local authorities in the proper and efficient administration of the
areas of their jurisdiction (NEPC/Planning Secretariat, 2004).

The number of local authorities in Sri Lanka is about 300, changing whenever areas receive new designation
and/or are further divided. At the time of writing, the North-East Province was divided into 75 Local Gov-
ernments and 71 divisions. Originally, before the introduction of Pradeshiya Sabhas, Central Government
had created the divisions to match Local Government areas (municipal, urban, town and village). Over time,
however, changes mostly due to ethnic group boundaries caused a mismatch and often these areas are now
not identical any more. According to the Operational Information of the NEP, there were 61 Pradeshiya
Sabhas, 7 Urban Councils and 3 Municipal Councils in 2004. Criteria for classification have not been fol-
lowed rigidly; hence there are Pradeshiya Sabhas in the country which more closely resemble resemble ur-
ban areas. “This situation is the result of not following any suitable criteria in determining the type of local
authorities. Even at present this is done in an ad hoc manner and not according to any accepted basis. If this
process is not regulated the growth of an unsystematic network of local authorities would be inevitable”
(GoSL, 1999). However, the classification can be broadly based on population size. Thus a Municipal Coun-
cil comprises a town with more than 30,000 inhabitants, and an Urban Council has a population between
10,000 and 30,000. Pradeshiya Sabhas contain areas with smaller towns and their associated hinterlands.
Pradeshiya Sabhas do not always have a secondary town but may have one or more smaller urban areas with
a population below 5,000 (ADB, 2000).

Local authorities can be considered as semi-autonomous. The people in them can assess the needs of their
area and make certain decisions, depending on the resources they possess. On account of the prevailing
situation in the Northeast, regional elections have not been held for most local authorities for several years.
Hence only some councils are headed by elected representatives, most of them in Singhalese majority areas.
All other councils are temporarily headed by Special Commissioners. A Special Commissioner (mostly the
same person as the Divisional Secretary) in the NEP has the authority to do the work of the chairperson of
the local authority. Yet some local authorities are disenfranchised even when they have an elected council,
since the practice of the Special Commissioner system has been so deeply internalised that even in some ar-
eas where local elections took place, the function is still retained.

Fundamental in our findings is the understanding of Local Government by the majority of our interview
partners. The common understanding is based on a narrow view of Local Government as a ‘sector depart-

48
ment’ just like any other sector (health, agriculture, etc.). It runs through all administrative levels as a branch
of a line ministry - Ministry of Provincial Councils & Local Governments – from the national to the local
level. Thus it is only one among many other sectors, thereby degrading its status as a proper Local Govern-
ment level. This is the current perception and structure prevalent in Sri Lanka (see Figure 11). The Sri Lanka
Institute of Local Governance corroborates this understanding of LG and its shortcomings in defining the
need for reforms: “The Local Government in Sri Lanka has not been recognized as a level of governance:
What we have is only a network of local authorities. Local Government is treated as a subject like Rural De-
velopment or Co-operatives, which is now devolved to the Provincial Councils” (Sri Lanka Institute of Local
Governance, no date: 32).

A different perspective is a comprehensive Local Government, an all-encompassing local level government

structure that integrates all sectors, and as such the consequential institutional complement to the National
and Provincial Government. These levels usually permeate each other (see Figure 12). The figures displayed
are grossly simplified, but serve the purpose to indicate that this difference in perspective is crucial in under-
standing Local Government and the role of local institutions, i.e. MC, UC, PS. As is visible from the two
comparative figures, LG in figure 11 is much less prominent than in figure 12. As a result, it can be much
more easily suppressed by others who, according to this perspective, enjoy the same status. Figure 12, by
contrast, shows that LG provides for the integrative dimension of all sector departments and the accountabil-
ity to the public/electorate. Unfortunately, the narrow understanding regarding Local Government is demon-
strated by the fact that local authorities do not enjoy constitutional recognition as a tier of the government
system in Sri Lanka.

Figure 11 Figure 12
LG viewed as a Sector Subject LG as a comprehensive government level

National Government Structure: National Government

National Line Ministries
Provincial Government

Health Agriculture
Local Government

Irrigation Industries
all Departments
within MCs, UCs,
Transport PSs

Local Government
Provincial Ministries

And more…
National Ministries

5.7.2 Local Government finance

As explained earlier, Local Governments receive their funds from the national budget through the Provincial
Government. There are, however, other sources of funding for Local Governments that do not necessarily
follow the same channel. The main sources are:

Rates
Other revenue
Assigned revenue (stamp duty and court fines)
Borrowings
Government transfers
Other receipts

49
The significance of the sources varies considerably between Municipal Councils, Urban Councils and Prade-
shiya Sabhas. For Municipal Councils, rates are the most important source of income, accounting for 35-
40% of the total income. Urban Councils and Pradeshiya Sabhas, on the other hand, depend largely on gov-
ernment transfers (30-35% and 25-30%, respectively). Rates play a relatively small role in the overall in-
come of Pradeshiya Sabhas (5%), while stamp duty and other minor receipts play a significant role.

The collection and transfer of rates present serious complications. Rates are levied by the Land Registration
Office and transferred to the Provincial Government for further transfer to the Local Government. The funds
however do not reach the Local Governments as expected. The same applies to court fines, which are levied
by the courts themselves. One of the problems in the case of rates is the capacity of the Local Governments
to maintain their valuation rolls (the document that determines the value of a property and the rate to be
paid). Regular updating of valuation rolls (usually every five years) is a costly exercise, which most Local
Governments cannot afford. It is however a “good investment”, since monies spent would be soon recovered
through the collection of updated rates. But the Local Governments seldom see the long-term benefits of
such exercises. Supplementary valuation, i.e. valuation of properties in new areas to be incorporated to the
rateable area, faces similar problems. In fact, most Local Governments do not have a clear picture of the of-
ficial boundaries of their areas of jurisdiction. In response to urban growth, however, Local Governments
very commonly provide services to areas which do not fall under their jurisdiction, or to such areas which do
not pay rates because they have never been valued.

In NEP the financial situation of Local Governments is even worse. Local authorities are hesitant to charge
fees, e.g. rates, to many of their subjects. The understanding is that the population of NEP is already pun-
ished disproportionately highly due to the conflict. Loss of property, damage of business enterprises, pay-
ments to the LTTE, etc. put additional burdens on the people. The imposition of property and business rates
would seem too much like castigation to these suffering people.

5.7.3 Planning at divisional level

Measures for decentralisation of planning go as far back as the early 1970s when Divisional Development
Councils were established together with a decentralised budget. Following this, the Divisional Secretariat
became the focal institution for planning of divisional level programmes. District Development Councils
were established in 1980, but dissolved and replaced by the establishment of the Pradeshiya Sabhas in 1987.

The divisional level constitutes a focal point in the process of decentralised planning and development, as
the node between national development strategy percolating through the provincial and district levels, and
the community development needs emanating from village level organisations. Till now the divisional de-
velopment planning process has been the major planning effort aiming at local level development in the
NEP. However, planning for development has been carried out in an ad-hoc manner and on an unsystematic
basis (Sivalingam, 2004).

Most of the development work is implemented by the divisional planning units, which constitute one of two
main branches within the divisional administration. The centre allocates the decentralised development
budget to the GA in a district. The GA then allocates it to the divisions which are ‘implementing’ develop-
ment activities. Activities of projects such as NECORD, NEERP, NECCDEP, NEIAP, and others are also
considered, yet as they usually have their own programmes they relate at best to the planning decisions made
in the divisions. However, implementation at divisional level is understood as monitoring and supervision,
which are seen as the major functions of the divisional planning unit. Even though field staff is available to
inspect progress of projects, the actual implementation is carried out mainly through local societies such as
the Rural Development Societies (RDS) and Women’s RDS, less through local NGOs.

Focal areas for development activities are identified in different ways. Besides the Divisional Secretary, who
has a say in setting planning priorities, there are some criteria used concerning, for example, (a) rehabilita-
tion areas, (b) poverty level, (c) remoteness of area/underdevelopment, (d) ethnic set-up, (e) demographic
features, etc. However, there appears to be no systematic approach in their application.

50
The Divisional Secretariat formulates annual plans, so-called Divisional Development Work Plans. They
contain budget allocation, and include responsible agencies, targets and outputs. It must be noted though that
this plan is a simple list of activities and projects, not a comprehensive development plan. It does not include
specifications on coordination, institutional arrangements, or strategic planning. In spite of this, it is espe-
cially the divisions which take on the role as collector of primary data for planning purpose in the entire
planning system. It is therefore at this level that we encountered activities resembling a planning process
built on data collection, analysis and decision-making. It is in support of the formulation of such Work Plans
that the Divisional Secretariat collects data and information from Grama Niladharis (GN Divisions) regard-
ing different sectors.

In the first instance, the plan content is decided at divisional level. Demand and needs-based project propos-
als from grassroots level are submitted via the GN Divisions. The Divisional Planning Unit assesses all these
proposals and a first selection and prioritisation takes place. The result is a compilation of projects in a
document that becomes the annual work plan of the Divisional Secretariat. This plan is presented to the Di-
visional Coordinating Committee for discussion, amendment and approval. A revised version is subse-
quently submitted to the district/GA. At this level, the plan is presented to the District Coordinating
Committee for further discussion and approval. Following this, it is then passed on to relevant Central
Government ministries, among them the Ministry of Nation Building and Development, but planners at
divisional level do not know in detail how the procedures work from there onwards.

This selection process is also subject to a political component, since MPs of the area are also involved. They
have the power to select special projects to be implemented with their own parliamentary budget (“Decen-
tralised Budget – DCB”). In this way MPs have the power to channel their political influence through the
district administration system, undermining to a certain extent the relevance of the local democratic struc-
tures, i.e. the local authorities.

The Divisional Secretariat distributes a copy of its Work Plan to other development agents such as INGOs,
provincial ministries, sector departments, etc. Eventually, the Divisional Secretariat itself will only imple-
ment a very small portion of the projects contained in the plan, expecting other organisations to implement
the remaining projects. In order to avoid duplication, the implementation of activities is supervised at the
district level during committee meetings.

In the case of Trincomalee, coordination between the Divisional Secretariat and Urban Council Trincomalee
occurs only at the highest level through the Special Commissioner (who is both Divisional Secretary and
Head of the Urban Council) in the committees. But the divisional planning staff do not sit in these commit-
tees. In spite of these efforts, there is a lot of duplication of work, e.g. in this case the UC planning comes up
with a plan, while the division has its own plan (the Work Plan). It is clear that this process could easily be
unified and a concerted effort could evolve to prepare one plan together, even more so as the Divisional Sec-
retary in his function as Special Commissioner unites both the Urban Council and the Divisional Secretariat
in terms of jurisdiction and responsibilities. Similarly, there is no proper coordination with other planning
agents, for example UDA, CEA, etc.

5.7.4 Local Government in the planning system

Local authorities derive their powers from the respective ordinances (see above chapter on legislation). Lo-
cal Governments are “charged with the regulation, control and administration of all matters relating to pub-
lic health, public utility services and public thoroughfares and generally with the protection and promotion
of the comfort, convenience and welfare of the people and all amenities” within their areas of jurisdiction
(Municipal Councils Ordinance, Section 4; Urban Councils Ordinance, Section 4; Pradeshiya Sabhas Act,
Section 3).

As remarked earlier, there is a multiplicity of laws regarding mandates and functions of authorities relating
to planning. There are several supplementary acts specifically relating to physical planning (and utility pro-
vision) which specify functions of local authorities. It is interesting to note that initially, after independence
“planning and execution of the ‘Plans’ 10 were entrusted to local authorities assisted by the Department of

10
Two types of ‘plans’ existed then: a) Zoning/Housing and Town Improvement Schemes, and b) Planning Schemes to control use of land.

51
Town and Country Planning [now National Physical Planning Department]” (Mendis, 2003). Although the
laws are vague in terms of defining clear planning mandates, many functions of local authorities have been
increasingly limited ever since by the Central Government.

Nowadays, LGs are in a very weak position to conduct any kind of planning. This is mainly so due to the
lack of capacity of the LGs to carry out their assigned functions, and at the same time due to activities of
other agencies such as the Board of Investment, Urban Development Authority, National Water Supply and
Drainage Board, and other semi-autonomous sector agencies (see figure at the end of this section) which are
widely seen as encroaching upon the mandates of local authorities. The planning unit within the Provincial
Local Government Department is there in name only, and largely dysfunctional. The situation at the lower
levels is similar. Planning units are either not part of the cadre or, if exist, are not functioning.

Thus at the R/ACLG office in Vavuniya we could observe that a kind of planning branch was only recently
established staffed with a Local Government Assistant (LGA). The LGA is presently aided by Community
Development Officers (CDO) who are working in the four divisions of the district. The initiative of setting
up this planning section seems to come from the R/ACLG, who took up this idea probably with the support
of the Commissioner for Local Government in Trincomalee. The arrangement is still informal and it is nei-
ther clear as yet where it will be located in the overall organisational structure of the office nor who will be
eventually responsible for planning.

Looking at the local authorities proper we find a similarly grim picture. For example, the local authorities at
the Urban Council in Trincomalee and Kinniya Pradeshiya Sabha have planning units in name only; and this
seems prevalent in most places. In the UC Trincomalee, planning is combined with civil works due to insuf-
ficient staffing (see figure below). Vacancies especially in top-level posts are high, which is a result of lack
of interest from the Central Government, which has the power to appoint public servants at this level. Even
though the planning section is not operational, various kinds of plans do exist, mostly financial and budget
plans. Proposals for 5-year, 3-year (so called capital plan) and annual plans are developed by the civil works
department and then forwarded to a committee that convenes monthly.

Under given circumstances this Development Planning Committee ‘replaces’ the non-existent Council. The
Special Commissioner, the Secretary of the UC, the Chief Clerk and the heads of all administrative depart-
ments of the UC constitute it. The final decision though rests with the Special Commissioner, whose main
role is actually Divisional Secretary for Trincomalee Town and Gravets.

In Kinniya Pradeshiya Sabha a Local Government Assistant (LGA) is formally in charge of the planning
division since 1999 (see figure below). According to him there is no other staff available for this function
owing to a chronic shortage of staff. A similar situation would be common in all PSs in the North-East Prov-
ince. The PS does not have enough financial resources to carry out maintenance and other related works laid
out in the Pradeshiya Sabhas Act, since the revenue base and tax income are very low. Instead, funds are
channelled through the Divisional Secretariat, which needs at least the consent of the PS to carry out projects
within its boundaries. The only interface between Divisional Secretariat and the Pradeshiya Sabha is the Di-
visional Planning Committee. This committee does not meet regularly but only on demand. The Special
Commissioner, who in this case, is at the same time the Secretary of the Pradeshiya Sabha, chairs it. 11

In both UC Trincomalee and Kinniya Pradeshiya Sabha the Urban Development Authority is supposedly
involved in the planning process. 12 In the first case there is a fortnightly “UDA Meeting” including represen-
tatives from UDA District Office, UC Trincomalee represented by the Special Commissioner and Secretary,
a Public Health Assistant (who belongs to UC administration) and the Medical Officer Health (MOH) of the
Provincial Public Health Department. However, it was not possible to find out what the subjects and func-
tion of this meeting are. In the second case, the chart of the structure of the PS it shows that planning is han-
dled by the LGA together with UDA, but in practice they have hardly any relationship besides some recon-
struction activities following the tsunami.

11
In this arrangement the office of the Special Commissioner remains at least with the local authority and not, as in other cases, with the Divisional
Secretary.
12
UDA covers all designated “urban areas”. Originally, all UCs and MCs fall under UDA areas, but not all PSs. In the course of time, however, po-
litical decisions resulted in some PSs also being declared as “urban areas”. Obviously the classification of “urban areas” does not follow clear defini-
tions.

52
The relationship between the UC Trincomalee and the NEPC is defined by the latter’s role as a local author-
ity that comes under the Provincial Department of Local Government. Thus it only has a real link mainly to
the Commissioner of Local Government. This relationship is basically confined to formalities such as staff
appointments and funds for salaries. Contacts with other departments, particularly the Provincial Planning
Secretariat, do not exist. Significantly, the PS staff pointed out that they have to follow the hierarchy of the
Local Government structure to reach higher levels of the NEPC administration. Direct contact with PPS in
matters of planning seems to be impossible. This appears to be a pivotal issue in Sri Lanka causing not only
enormous delay in activities and long bureaucratic procedures that hinder flow of direct communication, but
perhaps more seriously it even prevents government bodies from carrying out their designated functions.
Consequently, our question who they refer to when a planning issue has to be resolved remained unan-
swered. This is typical as apparently there is no mechanism for such procedures and no established practice.
It illustrates the weakness or absence of both vertical as well as horizontal links among planning actors.

The above outlined condition reflects the ‘narrow view’ of Local Government, since the Local Governments
follow their departmental hierarchies, which inhibits formation of meaningful intergovernmental connec-
tions based on subjects, e.g. planning. Thus it would be neglecting the line of command prescribed for the
Local Government’s planning section if it contacts Planning Secretariat straight away, and not through the
office of the CLG.

53
 Figure 13
13
Urban Council Trincomalee : (Simplified) Organisation Chart before the 2006 Elections
source: UC Trincomalee (2006) with own amendments

Special Commissioner
Council Instead of elected council
(Divisional Secretary Towns & Appointed by Cen-
Gravets Trincomalee) tral Government

Chairman

Vice Chairman political body

Secretary administrative body

Administration Finance Civil Works Health

& Planning Local authority

Internal
Audit Planning Works Fire
Officer Brigade
Architect

absent
elected body

13
From 14th April 2006 the Urban Council has been put in place following local elections held in Trincomalee district.

54
 Figure 14
14
Kinniya Pradeshiya Sabha : Organisation Chart before the 2006 Elections
source: Kinniya PS with amendments

COMMITTEE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE

COUNCIL

Council Member Chairman Vice Chairman

Internal Audit
political body
administrative
Secretary and Special Commissioner Medical Officer Health (MOH) body

Public Health Public Utility General Ad- Technical Service Finance Planning
Service ministration

1. P.H.I. 1. C.D.O. 1. Staff Assistant 1. Engineer 1. Book Keeper 1. Local Government

2. Sanitary Supervisor 2. Librarian & Assis- 2. Clerks 2. Technical Officer 2. Revenue Clerk Assistant
3. Sanitary Supervisor tant 3. K.K.S. 3. Revenue Supervisor 2. Urban Development
3. Pre-school teacher 4.Office Labourer Authority???

Sub Office Alankerny Main Office Kinniya Sub Office Kurinchakerny

absent elected
body

14
From 14th April 2006 the Pradeshiya Sabha was divided and an Urban Council created. Elected bodies have been put in place following local elections held in Trincomalee district.

55
5.7.5 Other planning agents at local level

A plethora of other planning agents operate and intervene in local level planning. Out of these, the parastatal
Central Government agencies are the most conspicuous ones since they have been given legitimacy for their
activities. This has not always been the case. Prior to 1989, local authorities had more powers in respect of
planning functions than nowadays. For about three years in the period 1991-93 all powers were devolved
and the districts were in fact weakened as compared to the local authorities. Significantly, the Divisional
Secretariat came under the Provincial Government. Thereafter this set up was unconstitutionally changed
through a circular to the advantage of politicians at the Central Government. This is the situation that re-
mains to this day, and the powers of Local Governments are still being undermined. After all one has to keep
in mind that before 1989 town planners and engineers were placed in UCs and MCs, but were removed af-
terwards to create national agencies such as National Water Supply and Drainage Board (NWSDB), Na-
tional Housing Development Authority (NHDA), Urban Development Authority (UDA), and others. 15

The figure on planning institutions (see end of this section) is an attempt to illustrate the existing planning
framework from a Local Government point of view. Although we cannot claim that it shows the complete
picture, it nevertheless clearly demonstrates the extent to which national institutions such as ministries and
specific agencies take over the role as key planning organisations, leaving Provincial and Local Govern-
ments normally at the receiving end. According to this, a ministry at national level, Ministry of Urban De-
velopment, is mainly responsible for spatial planning and provision of technical support. In addition, the
Ministry of Nation Building (former ‘RRR’) is of special important to NEP, as it produces district develop-
ment plans. Other ministries carry out sector-related programmes not shown in the figure. Several sector
agencies (NWSDB, NHDA, CEA, UDA) provide for the entire set of physical and infrastructure develop-
ment such as public utilities, housing, environmental and settlement planning.

Policy-making however, is fragmented between all these institutions, which is visible in poor coordination
and total lack of strategic planning. Proper development planning is made more complicated. Another inhib-
iting factor is the ambiguous division of responsibilities between the centre and the provinces (especially
exacerbated in the NEPC), which makes it difficult to improve administrative capacity at provincial and lo-
cal levels. Local authorities generally lack capacity for land management and enforcement capacity for de-
velopment control. Coordination of all relevant development actors is inadequate. Thus it is apparent that a
multi-headed, hydra-like construct exists especially in the area of physical planning.

Urban Development Authority

An important agency in physical planning at local level is the UDA. We have looked into its workings more
in detail because physical planning is currently totally neglected by provincial, district and local administra-
tions. As mentioned before, their understanding of planning is mostly confined to sector, economic and in-
vestment plans without drawing a link to the spatial dimensions and impact of planned activities.

UDA maintains several offices in the NEP. The main regional office for the Eastern Region is located in
Trincomalee, while two more offices were established in Batticaloa and Kalmunai in response to the tsu-
nami. Jaffna and Vavuniya offices cover the Northern Region. It must be noted though that UDA operates
only in the so-called cleared or government-controlled areas.

According to the Town and Country Planning Amendment Act No:49 of 2000, UDA carries out physical
planning activities for declared urban development areas. However, the National Physical Planning Depart-
ment (NPPD) formulates guidelines and policies for UDA and is in charge of the Eastern and Northern Re-
gional Physical Plans. Generally urban development areas comprise all Municipal and Urban Councils.
However, a large number of Pradeshiya Sabhas have been included in this category. For example, almost the
entire Trincomalee District was declared a UDA area in 1991. Obviously the term ‘urban’ is somewhat mis-
leading, as it refers to a region in which plans for local authorities are formulated. UDA is currently working
in Trincomalee for tsunami resettlement in Kinniya, and on a physical plan for Kantale, among others. In
2001 a plan for Trincomalee Town and Gravets was also prepared. UDA officials maintain that their plans
are comprehensive in terms of economic, environmental, social, and spatial aspects.

15
Personal communication with Ms Wijailudchumi, former CLG, NEP.

56
Usually UDA develops physical plans for Pradeshiya Sabhas on request. Its main function is to provide
guidance and assistance to Local Governments in planning and issuing building construction permits. UDA
does not have seconded staff within each local authority (this is misleadingly and incorrectly displayed in the
official PS Kinniya organisational chart). Lengthy procedures for plan preparation and approval with abun-
dant stages and authorities involved characterise the planning process. Draft plans climb up the ladder to the
highest authority, i.e. the Ministry of Urban Development. This structure reflects the highly centralised ad-
ministration of Sri Lanka and planning in particular, where a national ministry decides about such small
places like Mutur or Kantale. Normal phases of plan preparation are as follows:

1. Request from a local authority submitted to UDA

2. UDA prepares a draft plan
3. UDA submits plan to the local authority for their assessment (60 days/2 months), as well as to other au-
thorities (NWSDB and NHDA), which are asked to contribute in their capacity to the plan proposal
4. UDA makes changes and amendments based on comments received
5. UDA submits plan proposal to the National Planning Committee which is concerned only with urban
development
6. Then it is passed to the board of Managers, UDA
7. Finally it is submitted to the Ministry of Urban Development

It seems that a genuine permanent cooperation between relevant sector agencies such as NWSDB, CEA and
NHDA does not take place beyond the formal involvement in the above-mentioned process. A formalised
relationship or coordination arrangement between NEPC and UDA is equally absent. UDA officials argue
there should be a physical planning department at provincial level, but there is no such thing in Planning Se-
cretariat. Similarly, there is only a sporadic connection with the Chief Secretary. UDA attends provincial
meetings during which information is exchanged, but there is no official relationship. UDA officials have
the feeling, which is probably correct, that physical planning is often neglected in such meetings. So at times
it might seem difficult to include the physical dimension in meetings. These unspecified relationships have
their roots in the contradictory legal framework at national level (e.g. devolution vs. UDA Law) that would
specify procedures of coordination. Some UDA officers even believe the UDA should come under the
NEPC to guide and assist it.

Even though the UDA is a national agency, its Northeast offices are grossly neglected. The Trincomalee of-
fice seriously lacks basic resources to carry out its functions. It does not have enough computer facilities
(maps are still drawn manually) and communication facilities. The staff usually take a bus to carry out
fieldwork in the entire Eastern Region. The office is chronically understaffed, with four only professional
planners. Two main reasons can be identified for this condition. On the one hand there are no professionals
in town and country planning available in the Northeast, so that UDA depends on recruiting people from
other places. This creates the second main problem, for nobody is interested in coming to Trincomalee from
Colombo. As a result, current staff in UDA is entirely Singhalese, thus contributing to constraints in their
work. They are for instance, not able to enter LTTE-controlled or other Tamil-dominated areas, and so they
are limited in carrying out their full function.

The ethnic dimension is very serious in this case, as Tamil planners and staff would be crucial in building
capacity at UDA. It also carries further implications. A participatory planning process is unlikely to be con-
ducted if the planning staff has difficulties in getting admission to the respective area or does not speak
Tamil, even if they wanted to conduct such a process. Apparently the ethnic divide is a huge hindrance in
this respect to the planning process and indicates the importance of who prepares a plan and how it is gener-
ated. The example demonstrates the significance of a conflict-sensitive planning approach, which we deal
with below.

Role of NGOs

As indicated earlier, so-called NGOs and INGOs are important and dominant development agents at the lo-
cal level. Particularly in the aftermath of the tsunami the number of these organisations has gone up signifi-
cantly, raising the question of how they contribute to the needs and requirements of the people and how they
could be linked to local level administration. Several issues arise in this respect, the most important being

57
the lack of coordination and consistent planning to guide development agencies. There seems to bei no
proper mechanism at national, provincial, district or local level to coordinate the activities of NGOs. But
there are other reasons of relevance at local level.

On the one hand, NGOs find it difficult to find their way through the bureaucratic jungle of approval and
permits for their proposed activities, complaining about delays and non-transparent decision-making proc-
ess. The result is that they attempt to circumvent authorities whenever possible and to minimize contacts.
Nonetheless, it appears most collaboration takes place with the Divisional Secretariats while Local Govern-
ments are largely neglected. Only very few NGOs, it seems, take on this challenge and consider changing
the situation. One such attempt has been launched recently by People in Need (PiN), which decided to sup-
port the Divisional Secretariat in Kinniya to improve its capacities in coordinating development activities.

On the other hand, local level administration, both local authorities and divisional administration, is incapa-
ble of tackling the challenge of coordinating and monitoring activities of NGOs efficiently. A pivotal prob-
lem is the fact that the present planning process is not inclusive. Real participation and decision-making
processes do not take place in a manner that guarantees a product that really reflects strategic needs. The
population, CBOs, sector departments, and also NGOs are an insufficient part of such a process. The conse-
quence is that the local level administrations cannot present solid development programmes to the NGOs to
guide their intervention. In addition, the fact that the NGOs are mostly left out of the decision-making proc-
ess means that they do not feel part of it and would therefore not be co-owners of development.

5.7.6 Conclusions

Owing to the prevalent administrative circumstances, the government-controlled line of command is the pre-
eminent planning authority at district and local level. This situation appears prevalent in most districts, and
usually these entities are viewed as the singular actual planning actors, which automatically makes them po-
tential partners for governmental and non-governmental development agencies. While this appears to be cur-
rent reality in the planning process, it is not entirely clear where the district and divisional administrations
derive their mandates from for this role and function. Although the Transfer of Powers (Divisional Secretar-
ies) Act of 1992 opens the possibility of transferring powers and functions to the Divisional Secretariats, we
have not found a planning mandate backed by any Act of Parliament. Consequently, strengthening this struc-
ture would result in supporting a centralised administration that acts on a top-down approach, whereas the
constitutionally defined democratic local authorities, namely the Municipal Councils, Urban Councils and
Pradeshiya Sabhas are for the most part reduced to bystanders.

In other words, the Central Government administrative structure has been able to dominate local planning
even though there are other central agencies (UDA, NHDA, CEA, etc.), which were created to support the
Local Governments in fulfilling their part in planning. In this regard it is also crucial that we do not confuse
the term Local Government (i.e. UC, MC, PS) with the DS and GN, which are part of the Central Govern-
ment structures. 16 On the other hand it is neither possible nor practicable to neglect the key role of Divi-
sional Secretariat and District Secretariat in the planning process. Particularly in the NEP, the rehabilitation
and reconstruction activities are mainly carried out through this channel, under the leadership of the Ministry
of Nation Building and Development.

As to the actual planning procedures and processes, we believe that the shortcomings and weaknesses of the
system are generally well known to most observers and stakeholders involved in it. The fundamental issues
from our point of view, however, may be summarised as follows:

1. There are a large number of administrative institutions operating at local level, mainly national sector
agencies, the Urban Councils, Municipal Councils, and Pradeshiya Sabhas, and the Divisional Secretari-
ats. Ideally, the Divisional Secretariats should have been the administrative part to the Local Govern-
ments (PS, UC and MC). Yet presently they function as two separate institutions more or less independ-
ently of each other.

16
Technically, DS and GN are also part of local government, yet this term is reserved in Sri Lanka for the Local Government authorities (UC, MC,
PS)

58
2. Inadequate transparency and accountability characterises the planning process, whereby the main plan-
ning actors (Division/District) have no people’s representation.
3. Poor coordination and communication and frequent unwillingness to collaborate owing to asymmetrical
power relationships among stakeholders and even within departments. The tsunami emergency situation
forced the various planning institutions and levels to collaborate better and coordinate their activities.
Yet this was a temporary arrangement only, without institutionalisation of such coordination and coop-
eration efforts. Today, the situation has fallen back to the practices that existed before. A lesson learnt is
that if there is willingness and commitment, collaborative planning is possible.
4. Sectoral rather than integrated thinking dominates current planning practice, in part due to the under-
standing of Local Government as a ‘sector’. Spatial/physical planning is conceptually and institutionally
isolated from development (socio-economic) planning and budget formulation.
5. There is no unified organisational and procedural framework in place in the various planning units, be it
local authorities, divisions or districts.
6. Planning administration across all institutions is largely suffering from insufficient human resources both
in terms of vacant positions and skilled professional staff. This issue is strongly connected to the ethnic
conflict that limits free movement of Singhalese and Tamil staff.
7. Central Government exerts a high degree of influence regarding (1) staffing of higher public servants in
local authorities, districts and divisions, (2) planning in general through central agencies in districts, and
(3) the control of funds for development.
8. The sustainability of interventions of non-governmental organisations is jeopardised because they are not
based on proper local development plans, and because they take place largely uncoordinated.

If spatialised development planning is to become a genuine part of the democratic local planning system in
the future, emphasis must be put on the local authorities. It is imperative to reduce the distance between the
two administrative structures at local level in order to improve the planning process and consequently to in-
crease the impact of development activities. While it is recognised that strengthening both Local Govern-
ments and Divisional Secretariats is required, the focus will have to be on the first to bridge the gap between
them.

59
 Figure 15
Local Government Bodies and Development (Physical) Planning Institutions

Urban Development Au-

Ministry of Provincial thority
Councils & Local Gov- Semi-autonomous, MUDHC Ministry of Urban De-
ernment implementing agency
velopment
Designation of urban areas,
Technical support for LGs
their planning & dev. (incl.
capital investment), assistance
National Water Supply weak coor- to LGs in dev. control, urban
& Drainage Board dination infrastructure & services
Semi-autonomous
Responsibility: water supply &
LGs Guidelines, poli-
sanitation in SL, 75% of piped
water supply schemes, rest LGs LGs maintain PS, UC, MC cies for UDA
weak coor-
Elected local dination
authorities National Physical Plan-
National Housing Devel- responsible for Developed ning Department
opment Authority enforcement & NEPC Eastern/ TCP Amendment Act No: 49,
Semi-autonomous implementation Northern 2000:preparation of Provincial
Countrywide housing projects; Region & Local Physical Plans
Physical Plan
helps ULAs in slum upgrading;
low cost sanitation, resettlement Planning support for non-UDA areas

Central Environmental Divisional/District

Agency Ministry of Nation
Secretariats District Plans for
Semi-autonomous GoSL administrative NE Building and Devel-
Environmental Assessments, Pollu- structure opment
tion Control, Waste Management,
Conservation; assists LGs in con-
trol & regulation
Functional link Weak coordination

Conflictive relationship

60
 6
ORGANISATIONAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES
IN PHYSICAL PLANNING

As we pointed out earlier in this analysis, spatial or physical planning is a widely under-represented aspect
of current planning practices in the Northeast. Integration of socio-economic and spatial planning is gener-
ally a fairly recent attempt in Sri Lanka that has been promoted more seriously only since the mid-1990s
(Mendis, 2003). We consider such an integrated approach essential for the success of development planning
practice and implementation of development programmes. For this reason we decided to explore the existing
professional expertise and human resources in town and country planning in Sri Lanka and the Northeast in
order to identify the potential for synergies as well as capacity building for PPS.

6.1 EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS

There are several universities in the country which offer Town and Country Planning courses or closely re-
lated subjects:

University of Moratuwa
University of Peradeniya
University of Jaffna

University of Moratuwa, Department of Town and Country Planning 17

This is apparently the only fully-fledged department of its kind in Sri Lanka. It is presently one of the de-
partments in the Faculty of Architecture of the University of Moratuwa. The Department was entrusted with
the task of establishing post-graduate courses in Town and Country Planning, both by full-time instruction
and by research. It commenced its first two-year course leading to a M.Sc. (Town and Country Planning)
Degree in July 1975. 18 The Department also provides for the award of a Post-Graduate Diploma in Town
and Country Planning. Three persons have successfully completed this Diploma Course to date.

The Department commenced its first post-graduate Diploma Course in Urban Development in October 1979.
This Course was conducted by the Department in collaboration with the Urban Development Authority.
Eleven Post-Graduate Diploma Courses have now been completed. A total of 110 persons have successfully
completed their Post-Graduate Diploma Courses to date. A new course of study leading to the M.Sc. De-
gree/Post-Graduate Diploma in Land Use Planning and Resources Management was commenced in 1993,
and 4 persons have completed this Course. Another new one-year Course of Study leading to the Post-
Graduate Diploma in Housing Development commenced in 1996.

The department runs a four-year Honours Degree Diploma Course in Town and Country Planning with
about 50 students per intake, providing better planning expertise for regional and local level planning. In
2007 the first batch of students will complete the course with about ten Tamil students who would also be in
a position to work at local level.

17
Most of the information of this section is available on the university website
18
This course takes approx. 15 students each year and the programme has about 25 to 30 students in total

61
University of Peradeniya, Department of Geography 19

The Department offers undergraduate courses in regional planning and development as well as in urban ge-
ography. The main objective of the regional planning and development course is to provide a comprehensive
understanding of current regional development problems, both in developed and developing countries, and
the formulation of appropriate development plans to resolve these problems. Course topics include (a) intro-
duction to regional planning, (b) the concept of regionalisation, (c) strategies and approaches to regional
planning, (d) the experience of developing countries, and (e) new challenges.

The urban geography course is not primarily directed towards training in urban development planning. It is
rather designed to provide students with an introduction to the field of urban geography with an emphasis on
the concepts, theories, and classical empirical studies, relating to Asian cities. Course topics include (a) in-
troduction to urban geography, (b) the process of urbanization, (c) demographic characteristics of urban
populations, (d) urban functions, (e) ranking of urban centres, (f) urban land use, (g) concept of social space
and urban social geography, (h) intra urban inequalities, (i) and urban problems.

At graduate level a Master of Arts/Master of Philosophy degree is also available in Urban Development
Planning.

University of Jaffna

Courses in the above mentioned universities are usually held in Singhalese, which may pose a problem for
Tamil students and limits their access to specific subjects. To our knowledge there has not been any course
in town and country planning held in Tamil to date. The University of Jaffna has only now introduced a one-
year Master of Regional Planning with a research component, which was to commence in February 2006 for
the first time. Despite the grave deterioration of the conflict that escalated again to an open armed confronta-
tion during the time of research, the course seems to have started though delayed. According to information
received in Trincomalee, the course is held as a part-time weekend attendance course with 12 hours of lec-
tures per week (assignment-based course).

Remarkably, for the 30 seats available, a total of 750 applications were received. This indicates the tremen-
dous demand for such a programme in Tamil. If this course is successful, there is a great potential in the
years to come for drawing from these graduates for public administration in the Northeast. For this to hap-
pen, however, public service at regional and local level must become more vibrant and attractive to be of
appeal to such well-qualified graduates.

Other Programmes

From 1997 to 2001 there has been a joint project with the Canadian University of British Columbia and three
Sri Lankan Universities, the University of Peradeniya, University of Ruhuna and University of Jaffna to
build capacities in physical planning. Unfortunately we were not able to track down a contact person to find
out which components of the project were realized. Hence we do not know whether University of Ruhuna
offers any courses in this respect.

The project proposal justified the need for enhancing training capacities recognising that “a serious con-
straint in Sri Lanka is the lack of community and regional planning capabilities on local levels. Although Sri
Lanka has a history of attempting to integrate community development with physical development […], ur-
ban and regional planning generally focuses on physical infrastructure development. At present, town and
country planners are mainly trained in technical fields, such as architecture and surveying, and have little
professional background in comprehensive and strategic planning. There are no structures in place to in-
corporate the sociological, cultural, economic, environmental, and political aspects of developmental policy
among local planners. As such, practicing planners usually lack the capacity to give policy advice to local
elected officials on the strategic foundations of planning in a pluralistic democracy.” 20 Even though we are

19
http://www.arts.pdn.ac.lk/geography/courses.html, accessed 7-2-2006
20
[website to be added]

62
unaware of the outcome and impact of this project, we can say that this statement is certainly valid for the
situation in the Northeast, as the following section suggests.

6.2 TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING EXPERTISE

Looking at the capacities of town and country planning in the NEP, we have to keep in mind the whole
country. Town planning as a profession is a fairly young practice in Sri Lanka. Even in Colombo the first
master plan was formulated only about 30 years ago, and implementation has proved to be extremely diffi-
cult. This raises the question of how it could be functioning in the provinces. From the regional planning
perspective it appears the free trade zones and the Mahaweli Development Project in the 1970s were the ear-
liest examples. Preparation of so-called Regional Physical Plans has taken place only recently after the
Amendment of the Town and Country Planning Ordinance in 2000. Thus far the plans cover the Eastern
Province (Trincomalee, Batticaloa, Ampara), Southern Region (Hambantota, Moneragala, Matara, Galle and
Ratnapura), Western Region (Gampaha, Colombo, Kalutara), and North-Western Region (Puttalam, Ku-
runegala, Kegalle). A Northern Region Plan is currently in a preparatory stage.

Overall there are about 200 professional town and country planners in the entire country, of whom probably
5 or 6 are Tamil. Most of these town planners are working in government departments, whereas there is an
extreme shortage at local and regional level administration. This situation is prevalent not only in the NEP,
but all over the country. Although we have learned that currently there are a few former graduate students
from Moratuwa University who have taken posts within the NEP, we were not able to identify where they
are located. Two aspects add to the difficult circumstances in the Northeast. One is the issue that no town
planner wants to go to the periphery, and the second is that the Singhalese are afraid to take up a job in pre-
dominantly Tamil areas.

It seems one way out could be to give additional training to existing public servants. We have learned that
the NEPC 21 requested Professor Mookaiah from the University of Peradeniya to train Development Assis-
tants, mostly junior staff, from local authorities in local physical planning in December 2004 and March
2005. These were 10-day courses. The 25 LG officials who participated were also taken to Colombo to visit
NPPD and the Town and Country Planning Department of Moratuwa University. It is difficult to assess the
impact of the trainings. However, if the individuals do not experience a conducive environment that allows
them to test and utilise their newly gained knowledge in their daily work, the impact is very likely to be low.

In addition to the limited possibilities to utilise knowledge gained, institutions such as NEPC and the LGs do
not take full advantage of the functions devolved to them. It is apparently the absence of spatial planners in
local authorities and provinces that leads to NPPD’s task of assisting the LGs and provincial administrations
in physical planning matters. However, the NPPD does not have local structures. Therefore NPPD utilises
UDA offices, and UDA officers may act as consultants to NPPD. Eventually, the UDA carries out both ur-
ban and regional planning. Notably, the only local authorities that have architects and planners in their cad-
res are Colombo and Kandy. NPPD officers maintained during our interviews that there are training pro-
grammes under way to build capacities for regional planning. But they argue it may take up to three decades
to change the situation in Sri Lanka.

6.3 CONCLUSIONS

The current situation of town and country planning in Sri Lanka is a combination of a short history of this
subject as a profession together with a long history of a centralised State administration into which much of
the professional manpower is concentrated. Scarcity of human resources in town and country planning at
provincial and local level occurs all over the country, not only in the Northeast. However, as with many is-
sues, several factors aggravate the situation in the Northeast. One aspect is the fact that until the establish-
ment of a Master Programme at Jaffna University this year there has not been a course held in Tamil in that
field in the entire country. Thus the chances of Tamil-speaking professionals who would like to work in the

21
We do not know who exactly made this request, whether it came from the CLG Office or any other department. A training manual in Tamil is
available with Mr. Krishnananthan, Director MDTD, NEPC.

63
Northeast have been very low in the past. Apart from this, the university programmes in this field are not
focused on local level planning methods. Essentially they cater for the Colombo area and national agencies
involved in urban and infrastructure development, or the private sector. This needs re-focusing towards real
issues and conditions that exist at local level, and reviewing of course curricula.

Owing to the multiple tasks and limited resources available, it is particularly essential for the Northeast to
introduce the notion of spatial thinking and planning in order to identify priorities for proper allocation. For
this reason there is a dire need of physical planning expertise within the planning units at various levels of
the provincial administration and the Provincial Planning Secretariat itself. In the long term, NEP should aim
at attracting some of the Tamil-speaking graduates from the respective university courses, particularly from
Jaffna University, which may be seen as a ‘centre of excellence’ in this regard for the Northeast.

64
 7
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUE I:
DISASTER RISK PREVENTION AND PREPAREDNESS
IN DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

7.1 INTRODUCTION

Disaster risk management has been increasingly identified as an important aspect of integrated development
(e.g. GTZ 2002, UNDP 2004). The tsunami that hit the coastal areas of Sri Lanka in December 2004 may be
seen as an opportunity for change towards a better integration of planning for disaster risk prevention and
reduction. On a national scale, Sri Lanka is prone particularly to floods, cyclones, droughts and landslides.
In recent years disaster risk management has received much attention at a global level on account of the In-
ternational Decade for Natural Disaster Risk Reduction in the 1990s and the follow-up activities of the In-
ternational Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction. This has resulted in a paradigm shift of the disaster risk
perspective now emphasizing a holistic approach to disaster risk rather than the actual event (see table be-
low).

Table 6
Paradigm Shift in Disaster Management 22

Conventional Perspective Alternative Perspective

Disasters and conflicts are viewed as isolated events
Less analysis on linkages in society during normal times
Technical and law and order solutions are adopted
Centralised State institutions dominate the intervention.
Less people participation. People are regarded as “victims”
Implementing agencies are rarely accountable and their
processes are less transparent
Interventions come after the event
The objective is to return to the situation prior to the event
Disasters and conflicts are part of the normal process of
development
Analysing linkages in society during normal times is fun-
damental to understanding disasters and conflicts
Emphasis on solutions that change the relationships and
structures in society, the objective being to strengthen
people’s capacities and reduce their vulnerability
Decentralised institutions play the main role. Participation
of people is paramount. People are treated as “partners” in
development
Accountability and transparency are paramount in the
strategy
Interventions aim at preparing communities and mitigating
the impact of disasters
Disasters and conflicts are viewed as opportunities for
social transformation

In our view, it is imperative for the North-East Province to connect endeavours of sustainable development
with disaster mitigation by:

a) developing a ‘culture of prevention’ within the planning system,

b) connecting disaster risk reduction to measures of poverty alleviation, and
c) linking it with conflict mitigation.

The circumstances for introducing disaster risk prevention into the planning practice of the NEPC/PPS are
conducive. Several reasons make us think like that:

We can take advantage of the current awareness of the government and communities about disasters ow-
ing to the tsunami experience in order to establish a ‘culture of prevention’ in the planning system. There

22
Source: www.duryognivaran.org/indexnew.php, accessed 13-10-2005. Duryog Nivaran is a network of NGOs in South Asia based in Colombo
promoting disaster risk management.

65
 is a greater national interest in disaster mitigation, which may help to revive/strengthen earlier efforts
made to establish an overall policy and framework.
There has been some initiative by NEPC to implement disaster management, e.g. it has decided to estab-
lish Disaster Management Centres (DMC) in all eight districts and the Chief Secretary NEPC urged each
district to prepare District Disaster Preparedness and Response Plans. 23
There is a pressing need to transform the experience of mid-term tsunami relief and reconstruction into a
long-term development perspective: keywords are the ‘buffer zone’, NECCDEP coastal region develop-
ment, housing and resettlement (overlap with war-affected resettlement), and socio-economic recon-
struction of the northeast. A positive statement in this respect was already produced by the Chief Secre-
tary’s Office in February 2005 in the North-East Province Post Tsunami Response Programme.

7.2 CHANGING INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

Similar to the above-outlined parallelism in the overall administrative system in Sri Lanka, parallel struc-
tures do also exist in the area of disaster management. Apparently, reform or restructuring in the Sri Lankan
manner does not mean changing the existing system and mechanisms, but the creation of new institutions in
addition to those already in existence. Inherent in this practice is a shift of power and importance given by
way of political patronage, which carries the redistribution of resources to the newly created institutions.

The history of efforts to make disaster management part of national policies in Sri Lanka goes as far back as
1978 when in the aftermath of the mega-cyclone an Inter-Ministerial Committee was established as the pre-
mier policy-making body on natural disasters. Following this, a National Committee for Disaster Prepared-
ness and Management (NCDPM) was set up in 1987 which consisted of government ministries, statutory
bodies, and NGOs. NCDPM was supported by a National Level Technical Committee on Disaster Prepared-
ness and Management, but the two institutions were mainly technocratic in their focus. Although a Draft
National Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation Act was prepared by 1989, it was not made public until 1992
and never passed Parliament. 24 Despite the absence of a disaster policy or legislation the National Disaster
Management Centre (NDMC) was established in 1996 to initiate activities of the draft policy framework.
More recently, disaster management has been under the auspices of the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment
and Social Welfare until 2005, which also included the NDMC.

By virtue of the creation of two new ministries concerned with disaster management, this subject has been
given more prominence by the newly elected Rajapakse government. A separate Ministry for Disaster Man-
agement was created by the new government, initially with the Prime Minister as the head and since January
2006 with a dedicated Cabinet Minister (Mahinda Samarasinghe 25 ). The purpose of this ministry is to de-
velop strategic planning for disaster preparedness and provide a general policy framework. The National
Disaster Management Council comes under this ministry and is the policy apex body. A different ministry,
Ministry of Disaster Relief Services, caters for disaster response and post-disaster activities (see table be-
low).

23
Minutes of the Provincial Planning Committee (PPC) Meeting, Dec 1st, 2005, NEP.
24
“Facing Human Disasters: Future Challenges”, Keynote Address delivered by Senior Professor of Geography, University of Sri Jayewar-
denepura, M.M. Karunanayake at the 2005 Annual Convention of Sri Lanka Foundation Institute (SLFI), Colombo, October 21, 2005, in Sunday
Observer, Nov 6, 2005.
25
One of the UNP dissidents who crossed over to the government ranks.

66
 Table 7
Ministries of Disaster Management – Statutory Bodies and Gazetted Functions

Ministry of Disaster Management Ministry of Disaster Relief Services

National Disaster Management
Departments and
Council
Statutory Bodies
Disaster Management Centre 26
Coordination and management
of relief activities pertaining to
natural and man-made disasters
Coordinating awareness pro-
grammes on natural disasters
Early warning systems
Gazetted Func- Administration of Sri Lanka Dis-
tions aster Management Act No. 13 of
2005
National Centre for Disaster Manage-
ment
Emergency Relief Unit
Formulation and implementation of pro-
jects and programmes to provide emer-
gency relief to the affected parties in dis-
aster situations.
Implementation of rescue operations
following natural and man-made disas-
ters.
Coordination with relevant authorities to
provide relief facilities to the affected par-
ties.
Formulation and implementation of pro-
grammes to restore normal life and liveli-
hood of people affected by natural and
man-made disasters.

From a technical point of view there is no rationale for splitting up disaster management functions. 27 It
would make much more sense for the sake of better integration to keep the ‘disaster management cycle’ with
its three main phases of preparedness, emergency response and post-disaster rehabilitation in one hand. Be-
sides this, the split set-up has now complicated responsibilities across the two ministries, as the NDMC has
hitherto been working on district level structures that include pre-disaster activities and community partici-
pation, but is now under the Line Ministry of Disaster Relief Services.

Figure16
The Disaster Management Cycle
Source: National Disaster Management Plan, p. 7

Disaster Impact

Preparedness Response

Disaster Management
Mitigation

Recovery

Prevention
Development

This situation is due to another curiosity, namely the existence of the National Disaster Management Centre
(NDMC) and the Disaster Management Centre (DMC), which further aggravate the bewildering division of
26
According to the Road Map (2005: 4) it comes under this Ministry, but is not listed in the Gazette!
27
It seems the creation of two ministries to handle disaster management serves political purposes.

67
responsibilities and functions between several institutions. The DMC was established by the former Banda-
ranaike Kumaratunga government in 2005 - with nearly the same objective as the NDMC earlier - as per the
Disaster Management Act to facilitate the implementation of strategic plans. The NDMC, which many
thought would finally get legal power through the implementation of the Disaster Management Act, was thus
bypassed. 28 Since the Act mentions an institution to be established, the President took it literally and decided
to set up the DMC, while those involved in producing the bill 29 thought this would be the NDMC. This
move shifted the focus from NDMC to the DMC, and in the new arrangement it functions under the Ministry
of Disaster Management (see table above).

The President was of the opinion that the NDMC had grown too big and had become too bureaucratic and
slow. As a result she simply founded the DMC, instead of replacing it or initiating reforms. The DMC thus
became the prime actor for disaster management in the tsunami response process while the NDMC was side-
lined, even though it had more years of experience. Insiders reported the DMC “would get things done”
since it enjoyed the promotion from the former President who had simply shifted the attention towards the
DMC by concentrating funds and manpower there while simultaneously withdrawing resources from the
NDMC. At the same time, partners such as UNDP and ITDG moved away from NDMC to collaborate with
the more vigorous DMC.

According to the Road Map 2005, the new government would fully embrace the institutional framework
and, like its predecessor, would claim that the new disaster management arrangement provides for an inte-
grated institutional framework. This may be the general intention, but is certainly not what we see when we
look at the current picture. Particularly the relationship of DMC and NDMC needs further clarification. This
is indicated by a somewhat “cold-blooded backstabbing” of NDMC: “To avoid confusion amongst stake-
holders, the general public, donor agencies and the international community, no other department or institu-
tion should exist under the same name as or similar name to the DMC; e.g.: NDMC within the former Minis-
try of Social Welfare…The above agencies and others could be re-designated to avoid confusion and dupli-
cation of functions” (Road Map, 2005: 11). However, NDMC is not totally out of the game. In the Road
Map, due to its long-standing experience, NDMC is assigned, inter alia, to give guidance to DMC with re-
gard to implementing provisions of the Disaster Management Act and the formalisation and operationalisa-
tion of institutional mandates for Provincial Councils and Local Government agencies. Nonetheless, it ap-
pears the relationship, role and function between the two centres have not yet been clarified.

Table 8
Existing Central Government Institutions of Disaster Risk Management

Name of Institution Legislation Remarks

Ministry of Disaster Management
Ministry of Disaster Relief Ser-
vices
National Council for Disaster
Management (NCDM)
Disaster Management Centre
(DMC)
National Disaster Management
Centre (NDMC)
Gazetted by newly elected gov-
ernment
Gazetted by newly elected gov-
ernment
Established May 2005
Sri Lanka Disaster Management
Act No. 13, 2005
Established July 2005
Sri Lanka Disaster Management
Act No. 13, 2005
Created under a cabinet paper,
no other legal justification, but
part of the gazetted statutory bod-
ies of Ministry of Disaster Relief
Services
Politically supported as the lead-
ing ministry in disaster risk man-
agement
Hardly mentioned in any official
document; functions unclear
Chaired by the President, vice-
chaired by Prime Minister with
participation of leader of opposi-
tion, ministers, Provincial Council
Chief Ministers, five members of
the opposition
Implement directives of NCDM;
Newly established in 2005 &
given preference over NDMC
Dates back to 1996, has long time
experience also with community
disaster risk planning

28
This expectation was formulated in a paper by Mr. Hettiarachchi, Director of NDMC in Hettirachchi, N.D., 2004, National Disaster Management
Policy: Implications for Development, Colombo.
29
Mr Hettiarachchi, Director NDMC, who drafted large parts of it; ITDG/Practical Action, and others.

68
The insignificant role given by the current government to the Ministry of Social Relief Services and the
NDMC is further indicated by their total neglect in the institutional arrangement as outlined in the Road
Map. Even disaster response, which is their newly designated function according to the gazette, is ‘hijacked’
by the Ministry of Disaster Management. It seems that even if their role were defined, they would lack sup-
port to carry out their functions.

Table 9
Other Relevant Specialised Organisations in Disaster Risk Management
source: adapted from Road Map 2005 and National Disaster Management Plan [2004]

Name of Organisation Activities/Functions

Centre for Housing Planning and Building
(CHPB)
Urban Development Authority (UDA)
National Physical Planning Department
(NPPD)
Coast Conservation Department (CCD)
Central Environmental Authority (CEA)
National Building Research Organisation
(NBRO)
Sri Lanka Land Reclamation and Develop-
ment Cooperation (SLLRDC)
Sri Lanka Institute of Local Governance
(SLILG)
Irrigation Department
Urban disaster mitigation by developing physical planning
guidelines
Land-use zoning
Eastern Region Structure Plan mentions critical aspects
(flooding, construction, pollution)
Coastal zoning, environmental issues
Regulatory body in connection with industrial and chemi-
cal accidents, environmental pollution
Landslide hazard zone mapping
Services related to landslide disaster management
Assistance for resettlements
Reclamation and development of land while ensuring
flood-free habitat
Improving the environment
Awareness and training programmes related to natural
disasters and physical planning
Flood control and monitoring

Besides the immediate disaster risk management institutions, a number of specialised organisations and
agencies which have a stake in the topic can be listed. The table above is by no means complete but focuses
on those agencies which relate more to development and spatial planning.

Hitherto, disaster risk management has been dominated institutionally by the Central Government. Hence
the sub-national level organisation of disaster risk management is by and large negligible. Till today a top-
down process implemented through District and Divisional Secretariats, overseen by the District Secre-
tary/Additional District Secretary and guided by a Standing Committee chaired by the Provincial Chief Min-
ister prevails. Relief administration is usually carried out by the District Secretary through the Social Ser-
vices Unit at the District Secretariat. At divisional level, Divisional Secretaries/Assistant Divisional Secre-
taries are responsible to the District Secretary, while Social Services Officers and Grama Niladharis act as
supporting functionaries of the Divisional Secretaries. In local authorities, it is traditionally the Municipal
Commissioner (in MCs) and the Secretary (in PSs and UCs) who are given responsibilities related to post-
disaster management. 30 This approach is now contested by the proposed institutional re-arrangements.

7.3 DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT LEGISLATION AND POLICIES

Pushed by the tsunami, a number of disaster management policies and legislation has been created at na-
tional level in the past year. They comprise:

the Disaster Management Act No. 13 of 2005;

a policy framework called Road Map for Disaster Risk Management;
another policy framework, the National Disaster Management Plan.

30
This information is based on National Disaster Management Plan and “Facing Human Disasters: Future Challenges”, Keynote Address delivered
by Senior Professor of Geography, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, M.M. Karunanayake at the 2005 Annual Convention of Sri Lanka Foundation
Institute (SLFI), Colombo, October 21, 2005, in Sunday Observer, Nov 6, 2005

69
As a response to the tsunami, a Bill was approved by Parliament as Sri Lanka Disaster Management Act,
No. 13, 2005. It also provides for the setting up of a high-level National Council for Disaster Management
to oversee all activities in this area and the Disaster Management Centre (DMC). This Act provides the legal
basis and the institutional framework for disaster risk management in the country. More specifically, it in-
cludes the appointment of Technical Advisory Committees as deemed necessary by the Council, the formu-
lation of a national policy and programme, and a national disaster management plan.

While the act is an important step forward in institutionalising disaster risk management, there are already
voices suggesting it should be made more inclusive by embracing all forms of man-made disasters. This
missing dimension is also reflected in the fact that the link to sustainable development is not established in
the document. There is still a strong focus on the disaster as an event and not so much on integrating the
socio-economic dimensions of risk management. Though stressing the need to facilitate local and commu-
nity self-reliance, the Act mainly focuses on the establishment and functions of institutions at national level.
Mandates, roles and functions of sub-national levels – provinces, districts and local authorities – are not ex-
plained in the Act. This last aspect was a particular recommendation of the Parliament Select Committee
which was set up in February 2005 in the aftermath of the tsunami. Having been appointed to investigate the
disaster management structure of Sri Lanka, it proposed to delegate legal powers for disaster preparedness
and management to the Provincial Councils and local authorities. 31

Two national disaster management plans have recently been prepared. Of these, the National Disaster Man-
agement Plan (NDMP) was prepared by the NDMC before the tsunami 32 . Its validity has been significantly
diminished by the publication of the Road Map for Disaster Risk Management formulated by the DMC with
support from UNDP in December 2005. Naturally, the latter document is more up to date as it takes the tsu-
nami into account. Since this document is part of current government policy, it is almost certain that the
NDMP will disappear into the archives without further trace.

Both plans, however, envisage a strategy of institutionalising disaster management at operational level and
establishing a relevant framework. Therefore it is here that we find a clear statement of the need to create
and define mandates for Provincial Councils and Local Government bodies and to initiate action towards
vulnerability and risk assessment for Local Government areas. In fact, the content of the two plans does not
vary greatly (see table below). What is remarkable though is the complete neglect in the Road Map of the
particularly complex intermingling of the conflict and disaster risk dimension in the Northeast. In any case,
given our focus on disaster preparedness and mitigation, both documents point out the importance of inte-
grating disaster risk management into development planning by raising issues such as

landslide mitigation,
flood protection for major cities,
integrating disaster impact assessment into development projects,
national land-use and physical planning policy,
coastal zone management,
development controls and building by-laws,
housing, tourist and infrastructure facilities,
health risk due to polluted ground water.

In particular, there is a need to review by-laws and approval procedures of Local Governments to reduce
inappropriate construction and land-use practices in hazard prone areas, and also to avoid the creation of
such zones.

31
“Facing Human Disasters: Future Challenges”, Keynote Address delivered by Senior Professor of Geography, University of Sri Jayewar-
denepura, M.M. Karunanayake at the 2005 Annual Convention of Sri Lanka Foundation Institute (SLFI), Colombo, October 21, 2005, in Sunday
Observer, Nov 6, 2005
32
Not clear in which year, probably 2004.

70
 Table 10
Overview of some Major Issues covered by the two Disaster Management Plans

National Disaster Management Plan (NDMC)
• No timeframe given
• Rationale: national disaster management viewed as
vital part of national development process
• Brief guidelines for Provincial, District and Local Gov-
ernment level arrangements proposed
• Recognizes the complex situation of the conflict and
internally displaced people together with disaster-
prone areas in the NEP
• Environmental planning, land-use planning and regula-
tion, land management for sustainable development
• Strengthen community and NGO involvement
• Setting up a databank
Road Map for Disaster Risk Management (DMC)
• 10 years timeframe
• Rationale: aftermath of tsunami triggered re-
newed attempt to institutionalise a DRM frame-
work in SL; need has been felt to complement
ongoing policy and legislative efforts to
strengthen national and local level institutions
• Provides for establishment of institutional man-
dates for Provincial Councils, Local Government
agencies
• Makes no reference whatsoever to the particular
situation of conflict and disaster risks in the
Northeast
• Integration of disaster risk management into de-
velopment planning
• Community based disaster risk management
• Developing a Risk Information Management Sys-
tem

7.4 CURRENT ACTIVITIES IN DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT AND THE RELEVANCE

FOR DEVELOPMENT PLANNING

Besides recurring major disaster events in Sri Lanka, the paradigm shift in how disasters are perceived is a
major argument for its integration in a long-term planning approach. According to the alternative perspec-
tive, only when hazards mediate through society is there a disaster event. This approach of focusing on the
relationship between the natural phenomenon and society focuses much more interest on the links between
conditions that existed in society prior to the natural event and the disaster.

If a society-centred approach is applied to disaster management, quite a few disasters in Sri Lanka are linked
to land use and land ownership patterns, which pushes those sections of society that do not have the capital
assets to the more flood-, landslide-, and drought-prone areas to settle there. Although land use and land
ownership is only one aspect, it is a key dimension for understanding disasters in Sri Lanka. When looking
at disaster management issues focusing on linkages with conditions in society, it gets closely linked with
normal development issues, as it can range from settlement and resettlement, land use zoning to introducing
preventive measures to improving people’s capacities of coping mechanisms and resilience. Therefore the
following comment is especially valid for the Northeast: “…since anything to do with alienation of land and
land settlement in Sri Lanka has direct links with the conflict issues, the disaster management strategies
have to take into account the link between land and conflict as well.” 33 However, the tsunami demonstrates
the difficulty of separating these victims from conflict-affected population in the long term.

Since its inception, NDMC has also worked on village level with community action planning in order to
generate development plans that focus on disaster mitigation. For this they selected towns and Pradeshiya
Sabhas affected by drought in Anuradhapura, Hambantota, and other places.

NDMC has covered five districts in the country for Disaster Preparedness and Response Plans, but the proc-
ess is slowed down due to lack of funds. In addition, the process of establishing District Disaster Manage-
ment Centres all over the country including the NEP is under way. Some have been established in the NEP,
but not all districts are covered yet.

NDMC has conducted a pilot project in Ampara District to develop divisional disaster management in col-
laboration with the NGO ITDG/Practical Action. Yet, for reasons outlined above, since July 2005 RADA
(Reconstruction and Development Authority) and DMC collaborate with ITDG/Practical Action on develop-

33
This paragraph is based on Sunil Bastian’s article ‘Event-focused, emergency-mode’ reconstruction could weaken society, in Daily Mirror, Friday
9th December, 2005.

71
ing Disaster Management Plans for Hambantota and Ampara Districts. The plans will be in the local lan-
guage. This is a crucial aspect; UNDP had developed a plan for Hambantota in 2004 in English, which re-
mained unused for tsunami recovery activities because local people and authorities were not able to under-
stand it. The main idea behind the disaster management plans is to sensitise District and Divisional Secretar-
ies in their activities for development within their boundaries.

A District Disaster Preparedness and Response Plan formulated by the District Secretariat with support by
NDMC and UNDP has existed for Ratnapura since April 2005. Unfortunately, the focus of the plan is
clearly on disaster events, i.e. the organisational preparedness and operational response structure. Thus it
lacks a comprehensive programme of introducing reduction of disaster risks by taking the issue into consid-
eration for development planning practices as it can be found in both the above-mentioned national level
plans. Consequently, the translation of the ambitious objectives described in these plans has not happened at
the intermediate district level and the link to sustainable development is not established.

A so-called Disaster Management Information System (DMIS) 34 utilising a databank called DesConsultor,
adapted from Latin American countries which introduced it in their operations, is also developed by NDMC.
The data is available (at least partially) from 30 years back, and the databank structures on various levels
causes, events, impact on people and material, etc 35 . It also allows queries and relates the information to
maps. Since 2005 they are building up data for the NE. Data is collected monthly from divisions, but the
officers there have to be motivated and made aware of why they are supposed to provide such information.
For this purpose, NDMC holds workshops and trainings.

A connection to spatial and physical planning has also been established, as the NDMC has trained two offi-
cers of the National Physical Planning Department (NPPD).

7.5 CONCLUSIONS

Currently, disaster risk management is very much characterized by the dominance of national institutions.
Parallel institutional structures and fragmented responsibilities are the main issue. Even though the institu-
tional framework of disaster risk management is still quite young, there is already a need to create more
clarification. Additionally, the lack of coordination is a major obstacle in current disaster management in Sri
Lanka. There are too many organisations without any links, plus numerous NGOs which have a lot of money
to be spent but who are not part of an overall strategy. Lack of training and education of officials and the
public, resulting in poor awareness, inadequate emphasis on disaster preparedness are yet other reasons for
the slow process of institutionalising a disaster risk management framework.

A process of down-scaling disaster management to Local Government levels has only begun, but the re-
arrangement of institutions and their functions might cause delays in this regard. For example, NEPC has to
make a decision as to how it can utilise the Road Map (which supersedes the NDM Plan). There is a need to
acquire available data on disaster risks in the NEP and initiate a hazard mapping and vulnerability assess-
ment of the population and settlements which should be as complete as possible. The CIRM databank and
the NDMC disaster information system may be consulted for this purpose.

In theory, the turn towards a comprehensive disaster risk management framework that is integrated into de-
velopment planning has been executed. The legal framework and detailed activities to implement it are
there. Now it depends on the medium- and long-term willingness and commitment of politicians and admin-
istrators at both national and local level to put it into practice. Given the present conditions in the North-East
Province, disaster risk preparedness must be understood as a means of conflict and crisis prevention in terms
of resource allocation and participation of ethnic groups.

34
The databank is at present with the NDMC, which began this work, but the Road Map only mentions it as a task of the DMC. So it seems some-
thing like an inimical takeover is planned to further reduce the functions of NDMC
35
In 2004 the Ministry for Women Empowerment and Social Welfare with UNDP support initiated a systematic collection of disaster impact data of
the last 30 years (Road Map 2005: 3).

72
 8
CROSS-CUTTING ISSUE II:
CONFLICT-SENSITIVE PLANNING

We have identified four broad topics touching upon the areas of conflict and planning:

administration and ethnicity

land issues and the conflict
tsunami and war-affected population
current planning practice and the conflict

8.1 ADMINISTRATION AND ETHNICITY

Administration in the North-East Province is not a mere bureaucratic exercise. The NEPC owes its very ex-
istence to the ethnic conflict. The very creation of the Provincial Councils was a step to resolve the conflict,
and not primarily to devolve powers down the administrative line. One significant consequence is that after
the creation of Provincial Councils two unbalanced administrative structures developed. Genuine devolution
of power to the NEPC has never taken place and the dependencies from Central Government are great. Even
though the 13th Amendment is relevant for the NEPC, there are overlaps and “misunderstandings” in practice
which frequently lead to duplications. Even if the legal framework for the functioning and role of NEPC is
there, it is not translated into practice. For instance, the districts receive national funds from the centre, and
do not necessarily keep the NEPC informed about details nor envisaged implementations, even though there
are quarterly meetings of District Secretaries with the NEPC. Additionally, some officials also believe many
districts are under direct political influence from the centre in such a way that Tamil dominated districts
would get less funds than Singhalese districts due to the fact that the grants are distributed directly from the
centre.

The NEPC is mostly influenced by the centre through the Governor and the Ministry of Nation Building and
Development. Until the elections in November 17, 2005, some ministries at national level existed exclu-
sively for single districts or groups of districts: Ministry of Eastern Region and Muslim Affairs, Ministry of
Northern Region, Trincomalee, Batticaloa, and Vavuniya. From a northeastern point of view, the existence
of some such ministries meant an additional uneven distribution of funds within the region. Common prac-
tice is that Ministers only look after their electoral constituency to keep their vote bank satisfied and ensure
re-election. The funds they acquire as Ministers are mostly allocated there. This practice would even give
preference to Muslim areas over Tamils, as there was only one Tamil Minister (in the Government prior to
November 2005 elections). We were told such a situation would prevail in Batticaloa where it is observed
that Muslim areas would be attractively developed, whereas the Tamil area is neglected. We do not know
how much this conforms to the reality. But even if it does not, it indicates how much the perception of the
people is shaped by highly communalised thinking. On account of the conflict and Tamil claims for more
autonomy, re-centralised activities and the resulting dominance of the Central Government on provincial
matters, there is a high degree of distrust between a ‘Tamil’ NEPC and a ‘Singhalese’ national government.
This greatly impedes coordination and communication between the two parties.

The administration is being continuously moulded around ethnic identities in terms of staff and reshaping of
administrative boundaries. This is especially true for Ampara District with divisional peculiarities along eth-
nic groups. In response to popular request, the administration has been adjusted with ethnically ‘correct’ of-
ficers. Usually a Deputy Provincial Director Health Service (DPDHS) is posted in the districts and a Medical
Officer Health (MoH) at divisional level. In Ampara though, there are two DPDHSs posted due to ethnic
sentiments, since Tamil and Muslim communities asked to have one for each group.

Similarly, local authorities and at times even divisional boundaries have been changed and adjusted to ac-
commodate a single ethnic population. Obviously, “in multi-ethnic Sri Lanka these boundaries of the state
are not ‘neutral’ administrative units. Ethnicity and ethnic politics have a big say in their emergence, their

73
identity and also background of personnel sent to staff these institutions” (Bastian: 67). A recent example of
this can be found in Seruvila Pradeshiya Sabha, which is being split in order to create Seruvila as a Singha-
lese Pradeshiya Sabha and Eachchilampattai as a Tamil Pradeshiya Sabha (as an LTTE-controlled area).
Both ethnic groups benefit from this, the Singhalese in terms of political representation and the Tamil re-
garding the allocation of resources. This, so the expectations in Eachchilampattai, will allow more support to
be channelled directly to this neglected area than in an ethnically mixed Pradeshiya Sabha.

The internal administration of NEPC is also influenced to some extent by group belonging, ethnicity and
language. For example, there is not a single Singhalese colleague among PPS staff. Other agencies like UDA
have the issue of language and ethnicity as well, thus UDA has a serious shortage of Tamil-speaking staff in
the entire NEP, in such a way that it does not even maintain offices in some districts. The Provincial Surveys
Department, which comes under Central Government administration, is another example for an ethnicised
administration both within the department as well as regards its administrative boundaries. There are four
survey districts in the province (Jaffna, Vavuniya, Batticaloa and Trincomalee). A peculiarity is that Ampara
has been attached to the neighbouring Survey Department of Uva Province due to its high percentage of
Singhalese. While the survey officers in the districts are Tamil and Singhalese, both the provincial Deputy
Surveyor General and the Superintendent of Trincomalee District Office are Singhalese who do not speak
Tamil (this is perhaps a result of the centralized structure of the ministry, since the officers are required to
serve in various places in order to be promoted, and Tamil officers are rare). Therefore they pointed out that
language is internally a problem, for some of their Tamil officers in the lower ranks do not speak Singhalese.
Consequently, inter-personal communication is inhibited within the office.

8.2 LAND ISSUES AND THE CONFLICT

Many conflicts arise over control of land and claims of territory, especially physical planning attempts to
develop, regulate and control the use of land. In the given conditions of the Northeast, this becomes a highly
ethno-political issue. The Sri Lankan State can be considered the largest landowner in Sri Lanka: “it is not
surprising therefore that the political elite at the centre has been extremely reluctant to devolve power over
state land to a regional elite through a process of devolution. […]. In order to resolve the ethnic conflict it
has become necessary to vest land in the provinces in regional bodies which will be controlled by a regional
elite, and this is strongly resisted by those who control political power at the centre. As a result, wresting
power over land from the centre has been most intractable issue in the attempt to devolve power” (Bastian,
1998: 63).

Centralism is visible in the provincial structures. At provincial level the Department of Lands comes under
the Provincial Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Livestock Development, Irrigation and Fisheries, whereas the
Land Commissioner comes under the Central Ministry that develops guidelines for provinces and assumes
coordination function. Two-monthly meetings are held between the two in which the Provincial Lands De-
partment may bring up issues for discussion, but does not have effective decision-making power. Even if the
province wants to develop its own land, it needs approval from the Centre.

Land and property rights, related customs and what may be called common law play a significant role in a
conflict situation that produces a large number of refugees and unused land areas. Besides, demographic
compositions of entire areas such as Kinniya 36 have been changed as a result of the ongoing segregation of
all ethnic groups – Tamil, Muslim and Singhalese. It is additionally linked to resettlement colonization pro-
grammes orchestrated by the Central Government that have the impact of shifting the majority–minority
population patterns in a region (see Kantale or Ampara) and have been carried out with a nationalist agenda:
“Colonisation schemes, while on one hand being part and parcel of agrarian populism and serving interests
of large-scale capital also have a close link with Singhala nationalism” (Bastian: 65). Especially in the East-
ern Province the demographic pattern has changed significantly in virtue of such colonization schemes (in
favour of the Singhalese population).

36
In this area segregation of Hindu and Muslim population was accelerated after the beginning of the war in the 1980s, turning Kinniya into an al-
most entirely Muslim area. As this happened not too long ago, many Tamils have feelings about this, since reconciliation has not been engaged in on
such matters.

74
Further contributing to the question of ownership is the absence of cadastral records all over the NEPC (in
fact anywhere in Sri Lanka). 37 At best deeds exist but no land titles. According to information from the Sur-
vey Department Trincomalee District, 99% of the property is handled through the deed system which takes
notice only of the transaction, whereas a cadastral system registers the land. This deed system is based on
inheritance so that after a few generations and sub-dividing of plots it is very difficult to verify who the le-
gitimate owner is.

Traditional land right customs have their own impact. As we learned, land which is not cultivated or is un-
used can be occupied by someone else. If the original owner does not return within ten years, the property
right may be passed to the new occupier, provided nobody has any objections and evidence of the occupa-
tion for the entire period is provided. Since such a practice would cause a serious problem for displaced per-
sons who were forced to leave their property, an act was created that exempts war-affected areas. Also,
property whose owner lives abroad does not come under this customary law either. In spite of such regula-
tions, the Department of Lands reports on the difficulties of rehabilitating internally displaced persons (IDP)
since outsiders have often occupied their land. When people want to return now to their homes in Mullaitivu,
Killinochi, Vavuniya and other places, conflicts over ownership arise. The Department attempts to provide
for those who lost their land. Those who do not want to return can apply for allocation of land somewhere
else.

8.3 THE TSUNAMI-AFFECTED AND WAR-AFFECTED POPULATION

To further exacerbate the plight of people in the war-torn Northeast, the occurrence of the tsunami in De-
cember 2004 further slowed down rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts. Maybe even more significant in
terms of its long-term effect is the impact of a tremendous number of international NGOs that poured into
the region. Besides many positive effects, it contributed to intensifying the already existing unbalanced de-
velopment activities within the Northeast. There are several dimensions to this. One, suddenly huge funds
became available for tsunami rehabilitation, causing neglect and exclusion of the war-affected population.
Second, like war-affected rehabilitation, tsunami reconstruction focused mainly on non-LTTE areas, and
thirdly, for the sake of convenience and for logistical reasons the activities again concentrate on certain dis-
tricts leaving others on the side.

However, while in the beginning the view prevailed that funds were donated for the tsunami only and conse-
quently have to be used for this specific purpose, it has been increasingly recognized that this is not feasible
in the long run. It therefore appears that more NGOs have noticed this imbalance, so that those which are
committed to continuing their work in the Northeast cautiously started turning towards integrating war-
affected people in their programmes.

Again it becomes clear that nothing in the Northeast can be separated for too long from the circumstances of
the ethnic conflict. Planning rationale must therefore include this particular environment. From a develop-
ment and physical planning point of view, tsunami and war reconstruction and rehabilitation have multiple
interfaces when it comes to decisions on resettlement, land use zoning, infrastructure and economic devel-
opment as well as safeguards to reduce the risk of disasters.

8.4 CURRENT PLANNING PRACTICE AND THE CONFLICT

Even though the former ‘Triple R’ Ministry (now Ministry of Nation Building and Development) carried
‘reconciliation’ in its name, it seems there is no distinct approach by national agencies such as ministries and
national agencies in conflict-sensitive development planning. Yet these are the main agents who are actively
involved in plan formulation and policy-making for the Northeast.

It appears that the manner in which district development frameworks were developed and their results are
indicative of backward-oriented thinking. As we learned, such plans are more of a wish list than proper de-
velopment plans. The authors of such plans have studied the present circumstances and aim more at restor-

37
There is a pilot project under way, the Land Title Registration Project based in Colombo, but with no wider impact so far.

75
ing the status quo ante without a clear emphasis on development. Similarly, the Eastern Province Physical
Plan cannot be considered as actively contributing to conflict-sensitive planning, even though it claims to do
so. It lists the objective “to enhance social harmony through rational allocation of resources”. This state-
ment, however, gives rise to several problems by its implication that all involved stakeholders are agreed on
the same ‘rationale’ in terms of the meaning of ‘rational allocation’ in this context. Apparently it carries the
connotation that such decisions rest on the availability of a sound and accurate database, which has been cre-
ated with “thorough scientific methods”.

Besides the absence of such a database it is evident that this rationale has been proved unsatisfactory for
planning processes in many parts of the world, since ‘scientific’ data have been increasingly challenged by
public interest and citizen’s groups (and for this reason planning theory and practice has ever since moved
on trying to improve participation of stakeholders). But even more salient in the given sensitive environment
of the Norteast is a balanced allocation of resources taking into account the ethnic sentiments. This notion
would shift the meaning of a balanced development process and the underlying rationale of resource alloca-
tion from a scientific argument that attempts to channel resources to the least developed sectors/geographical
areas to a political judgement of balancing allocation among the three communities.

As we observe it, currently an ‘adverse’ style of planning is prevailing in Sri Lanka; countering this would
require development of a collaborative approach towards planning. It should be understood that recognising
and resolving conflict of interests is an integral part of every planning process. In simple words, conflicts
arise when people pursue goals which clash. Therefore there is a need to identify and develop mechanisms
for conflict management and resolution. On the basis of this notion two main dimensions of conflict relating
to planning are relevant in the NEP: a) conflicting interests in planning processes, for they eventually have
an impact on decisions of resource allocation; these interests are strongly influenced by b) the circumstances
of the ethnic conflict. Present conditions in the Northeast determine and intensify conflicts, conflicts which
exist in planning processes anyway, but reinforced by:

1. the parallel administration structures,

2. an almost total budget dependency from the Central Government,
3. the ethnic conflict, and
4. the tsunami.

Conflicts at local level may be distinguished between resource conflicts, political conflicts and identity con-
flicts (Development Studies Institute and South Asia Institute 2003: 13-14). Often there are overlapping di-
mensions within the existing conflicts. For instance, disputes over land use rights have a resource dimension,
as it is a struggle over claims to scarce resources (status, power), but the disputes can be interlinked with
political dimensions within a partisan political system as well as include dimensions of identity conflicts if
different identity groups (ethnic, caste, gender etc.) are involved.

Figure 17
Conflict Types at the Local Level

Resource
Political
Conflicts
Conflicts

Identity Conflicts

We also noted a considerable lack of a culture of discussion within the NEPC administration (and beyond).
The Provincial Planning Committee (PPC) is the only forum where the various actors in the NEPC meet.
But its use as a tool enhancing the planning process is very limited as it is always in a hurry and no time is
allowed for discussions. This seems to reflect a general attitude, since we heard there is generally no space

76
given for discussions within the NEPC administrative system. A change in attitudes and mindsets would be
necessary. As to our observations the current barriers for a collaborative planning approach include among
others:

People are afraid to share information believing they would lose influence, thus often a certain de-
gree of secrecy is maintained;
Strengthening one player is viewed as weakening others;
There is no sense of the existence of win-win situation, no feeling that well-managed interventions
could be for the benefit of all;
Power is largely seen as an individual asset that can be used for one’s own good and advantage to
exploit others; this goes together with
Strong hierarchical relationships: this is valid within departments and in each administration sector,
as well as between the actors;
Power-sharing is perceived as a zero-sum game: the philosophy is not ‘together we are strong’ but
‘the strongest comes out on top and tries to stay there as long as possible’.
For all the above reasons, the sense of collective action that brings stakeholders at the same table to
negotiate planning decisions is very weak to non-existent.

8.5 CONCLUSIONS

Both the ethnic conflict and the tsunami disaster have a strong spatial component. They both involve land
management and zoning. In addition they are both deeply intertwined with socio-economic development
issues ranging from rebuilding livelihoods of tsunami victims to customary land rights. The ‘spatial’ compo-
nent is also reflected in the adjustment of administrative units, at times even cutting across provincial
boundaries. A planning process must therefore integrate development with physical planning features.

It is crucial to understand that hitherto administrative and electoral adjustments and rearrangements have
contributed to increased segregation and separation of all the three communities – Tamil, Muslim, Singha-
lese – in the NEP, especially in its Eastern parts. Till now no genuine reconciliation effort has been made to
‘bridge’ the ethnic divides. However, at local level it might be unavoidable to create a sense of ‘common
fate’ that includes all three communities. It is for this reason that ‘planning’ and the allocation of resources
are seen as a zero-sum game in which always the ‘others’ win and one’s own people are prone to lose.

A participatory and transparent planning process that attempts to include members of represented local eth-
nic groups can provide not only a common understanding on the use of limited resources, but has the poten-
tial of a conflict-sensitive and reconciliatory planning approach. From the point of view of the NEPC and
Provincial Planning Secretariat this means keeping in mind that the rationale of resource allocation should
incorporate not only ‘factual’ criteria but also equal distribution. This can only be achieved if the decision-
making process is kept as open and inclusive as possible.

77
78
 9
PROPOSED INTERVENTIONS

In view of all the aspects discussed above, sustainable interventions in the field of development planning
have to come in a package that offers a comprehensive combination of activities in order to achieve signifi-
cant impact. While the general objective is to strengthen the development planning process in NEP through
improved performance of the Provincial Planning Secretariat, this objective can be specified at various lev-
els.

The interventions proposed below reflect a summary of issues that need to be addressed to achieve sustain-
able improvement of development planning in NEP. However, some of these issues cannot be tackled by the
authors and would need other stakeholders and partners to assume responsibilities in this respect.

9.1 FRAME CONDITIONS: NATIONAL LEVEL

The dual system of administration in the country is something that needs to be addressed at the highest level.
From our point of view, the main areas of concern in the field of development planning are the following:

• Devolution is not really taking place. Fiscal devolution has not happened to give functional devolu-
tion real meaning. Decisions concerning devolved functions are strongly influenced by the centre
due to the unbalanced financial situation
• The “Concurrent List” in the Ninth Schedule of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution (List
III) makes it difficult for the Provincial Governments to carry out functions specified in the list,
since they are directly competing with Central Government
• The implications of the “Provincial List” in the same amendment (List I) need to be clarified to all
stakeholders (national level, provincial and sub-provincial branches of national ministries, Provin-
cial Government, and Local Governments), as well as to development partners and the private sec-
tor. The real meaning of these devolved powers seem not to be known to all development agents
• The Provincial Government should be the sole coordinator of all interventions in NEP. Final deci-
sion on central functions as defined in the “Reserved List” of the amendment (List II) would still
remain with the central ministries, but they should not by-pass the coordination role of the Provin-
cial Government. Functions defined in the “Provincial List” and in the “Concurrent List” should
definitely be coordinated by the Provincial Government.
• At local level, the existence of a Divisional Secretariat and a separate secretariat to the Local Gov-
ernment is an unnecessary duplication and therefore a waste of resources. The adequate staffing of
two fully-fledged local administrations is almost impossible in view of scarce human and financial
resources. An amalgamation of the two is unavoidable. Until then, closer cooperation is required
• In general, implementation of the 1999 Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Local Government
Reforms should be carried out

These areas of concern require directives from national level. International development partners could and
should lobby at the various Central Government bodies to which they have access.

9.2 INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT: NEPC

Institutionalisation of relationships, flow of information

Within the Provincial Government, the role and image of the Provincial Planning Secretariat has to be clari-
fied and strengthened. It is quite obvious that Planning Secretariat is not playing the role it should be, and
that other development agents do not really support the proper operation of such a planning office. The posi-
tion of the Planning Secretariat has to be strengthened in relation to the other departments within the Provin-
cial Government, towards provincial branches of Central Government, towards development agents at dis-

79
trict level (especially the District Secretariat), and towards development agents at local level (especially Di-
visional Secretariat and Local Government). In order to achieve this, the relationship between these bodies
needs to be clarified and institutionalised.

One area where this relationship needs improvement is the submission of data and information from provin-
cial departments. This flow of information should happen automatically, which is not the case now. In gen-
eral, the flow of information between levels and between organisations at the same level has to be improved.
The establishment of standardised and computerised databanks is urgently required. Ideally, the local level
(Divisional Secretariat and Local Government) should regularly submit (electronically) all information to the
District Secretariat, which in turn would submit the compiled information to the Provincial Planning Secre-
tariat. The same procedure should be adopted by all sectors: sector-specific information should be collected
at grassroots level, compiled at local level, submitted to district level sector offices, and from there to pro-
vincial sector offices (and later to national level).

For practical reasons, the improvement of the relationships (information sharing) between provincial sectors
and PPS should be the starting point for an intervention. Information regularly required at PPS should be
identified and communicated to the provincial sector departments (variables). Adequate infrastructure needs
to be established (databanks). Better attitudes towards information-sharing need to be encouraged. Finally,
an agreement needs to be reached whereby the sectors regularly submit a pre-determined package of data
and information to the PPS in electronic format.

The same procedure needs to be established between PPS and the District Secretariats, and between these
and the Divisional Secretariats. The question regarding information from the Local Governments (who do
they submit it to?) needs to be clarified. Obvious options are: the ACLG (district level), the District Secre-
tariat, or PPS directly.

The institutionalised sharing of data and information between projects and PPS needs to be assessed. The
automation of this might be more difficult owing to the peculiarities of donor requirements in each project.
However, during a workshop in Habarana in June 2006, project directors emphasised the importance of such
information sharing, especially to guarantee the institutional memory of the projects.

Finally, the issue of submission of data and information from centralised sectors and agencies to NEPC/PPS
needs to be addressed. Information of departments as important as e.g. Surveys, but also of central institu-
tions such as e.g. the Police are crucial for the proper development planning of NEP.

Formulation of plans, manuals and guidelines

Similarly, processes of plan formulation and approval need to be clarified, simplified, harmonised and insti-
tutionalised. Respective guidelines and manuals – partly already in existence – have to be utilised. On the
basis of the principle of subsidiarity, local plans should be prepared at local level and supervised by the dis-
trict level. District level plans should be prepared at district level and supervised by the provincial level. In
order to guide these processes, the Provincial Government through its planning section (Provincial Planning
Secretariat) should clearly establish which guidelines and manuals have to be followed. If necessary, the
Planning Secretariat should develop such guidelines.

In general, Planning Secretariat has to be accepted within NEPC as the guiding body in terms of integral pri-
orisation of interventions. Planning Secretariat has to combine and analyse all (sectoral) information and
formulate overall objectives - the framework for all provincial (and central) departments. Sectoral plans
should be formulated in line with this framework.

NEPC and PPS argue that the formulation of an overall provincial policy and framework is not possible due
to the absence of an elected Provincial Council. We are not of the same opinion. On the contrary, since PPS
is not formulating such an overall development framework, others are taking the opportunity to do so ‘on
behalf’ of NEPC. A good example of this is the Eastern Province Structure Plan mentioned above. Neverthe-
less, owing to the procedural errors committed in the formulation of the plan, NEPC and PPS have been
given a good opportunity to formulate an overall development plan of their own which in turn could serve as
framework for sectoral and sub-provincial development planning and interventions. Therefore, PPS should

80
review, amend and improve the draft Eastern Province Structure Plan, discuss it with all relevant stake-
holders in the province and have it approved at a Provincial Planning Committee meeting as the overall me-
dium-term integral development plan for the province. Similarly, NEPC/PPS should get strongly involved in
the formulation of the Northern Province Structure Plan, which is being commissioned by the National
Physical Planning Department.

Stronger linkages with Central Government organisations in physical planning

In terms of its planning functions in a wider sense, the Provincial Government should improve the relation-
ships between the Planning Secretariat and other departments outside NEPC. As mentioned earlier, there are
two organisations which are crucial in terms of cross-cutting planning: National Physical Planning Depart-
ment and Urban Development Authority. Stronger linkages between Planning Secretariat and these organisa-
tions have to be established. Planning Secretariat does not necessarily need to build up the capacity to carry
out the physical planning functions autonomously, but it needs to have the capacity to lead such processes.
The actual technical work can still be carried out by these other organisations, which is why an improved
coordination is important. A concrete task that needs to take place is the prioritisation of urban centres for
the intervention of the UDA. By establishing such a provincial prioritisation, ad hoc and politicised UDA
interventions could be avoided. Planning Secretariat should defined the ideal urban network of the province
and determine a sequence for development of the urban centres.

A third department which is of fundamental importance for Planning Secretariat if it wants to tackle devel-
opment planning (as proposed by this report) is the Surveys Department. While mapping is essential for de-
cision-making, surveying is fundamental for implementation, especially for Local Governments.

Increased effectiveness of coordination spaces

Coordination spaces need to be redefined. Coordination meetings rarely serve to really coordinate, let alone
discuss issues. Important meetings at provincial level, e.g. the provincial planning committee meeting,
should be given more time or should have subsidiary sub-committees, to allow adequate exchange of ideas
and proper coordination of activities. Discussions and coordination regarding planning should happen hori-
zontally (between provincial departments and other agents at provincial level) and vertically (between man-
agement and planning units of the provincial, district and local levels). In most cases, these processes could
and should be divided. Planning matters concerning provincial level issues (e.g. sectoral allocation of fi-
nances) do not necessarily need the participation of district, divisional and Local Government representa-
tives. Similarly, planning matters concerning sub-provincial levels (e.g. introduction of a new planning
manual for local authorities) do not necessarily require the participation of representatives from all provin-
cial departments. On the other hand, other stakeholders need to be represented at the meetings to coordinate
overall development interventions in NEP: central ministries and agencies, and the (organised) civil society.

Closer interaction between planning units of all levels

A third kind of coordination space should be established for planning units of all levels. Provincial Planning
Secretariat should meet district planning staff (Deputy Director Planning), divisional planning staff (Assis-
tant Director Planning) and Local Government planning staff. This kind of meeting does not take place at
all, but would be very useful to guarantee a regular exchange between these development agents. For this to
work, the higher levels have to understand themselves as support organisations to the lower levels. Problems
regarding planning at local level could be addressed and resolved in such meetings; guidelines produced at
provincial level could be introduced and explained.

Provincial Planning Secretariat as service provider for lower levels

The idea of transforming Provincial Planning Secretariat into a service provider for the sub-provincial plan-
ning units needs to be further explored. However, if realised, Provincial Planning Secretariat staff would be
responsible for too many planning units at local level, while recruiting adequate numbers of planners is not
an option. Therefore, the solution would be to rely on the district level to backstop the local level. In this
sense, Provincial Planning Secretariat would work closely with eight district planning units. Each district
planning unit would in turn work with the respective local planning units (Divisional Secretariat’s and Local

81
Government’s planning units). The amalgamation of the two planning units at local level would obviously
ease this arrangement. The feasibility of this approach in view of the different “masters” of provincial and
district administrations needs careful analysis and discussion.

9.3 ORGANISATIONAL LEVEL: PROVINCIAL PLANNING SECRETARIAT

One factor that contributes to the weak role of the Planning Secretariat is the way it is organised to carry out
its functions. The temporary arrangement with a part-time head of department is not sustainable, and the
high number of vacancies among middle ranks makes it impossible for it to assume its role fully. The filling
of key positions is fundamental.

However, the current organisational structure of the Planning Secretariat reflects more the available staff
rather than the functions. A reorganisation of the structure is imperative, even if it should only serve to show
why certain functions cannot be carried out.

It is also important, especially under the given circumstances, to increase the existing capacities within the
Planning Secretariat. Further tailor-made trainings have to be arranged to bridge the gaps between functions
of Planning Secretariat and available staff. The working culture should be revised in order to promote initia-
tive and commitment among the staff.

9.3.1 Organisational structure

Revised organisational structure

After revising the mandate and functions of the Planning Secretariat and comparing them with the current
organisational structure, it was agreed to develop a new design for the organisational set-up. The new organ-
isational arrangement should correspond to and reflect the very purpose of Provincial Planning Secretariat.

Functions

The functions defined for the Planning Secretariat should also be revised. A proposal for discussion is shown
in the table below.

Table 11
Proposed functions for Provincial Planning Secretariat

Function Old New

Assisting Provincial Planning Council in matters pertaining to provincial planning x
Performing secretarial functions of Provincial Planning Committee x
Assisting Chief Secretary in planning development activities and … x
… negotiations for funding projects x
Attending to matters pertaining to provincial development policy and strategy x
Undertaking surveys, investigations and studies connected to provincial economic development x
Monitoring progress of public and private sector investment programmes within the province x
Formulation of guidelines and manuals for provincial and sub-provincial planning x
Assistance to sub-provincial levels in planning processes x
Improvement of provincial and sub-provincial coordination mechanisms x
Formulation of integral provincial development plan x
Preparing medium-term rolling plan and annual implementation programme x
Setting overall guidelines and strategies and coordination of divisional development plans, sectoral plans x
and other operational plans
Coordination of major donor-funded projects x
Progress control of all capital investment programmes under devolved subjects x
Coordination of major development projects x
Monitoring sustainability of all interventions at community level x
Installing and maintaining a planning information system and operations room x
Creating, updating and maintaining database for provincial development planning x
Developing an information resource management system of the NEPC x

82
Facilitation of computerised information systems at sub-provincial levels and at all sectors x
Establishing of automatic flow of information from sub-provincial planning units and all sectors to PPS x
Publicising implementation of programmes and achievements x
Formulating training programmes to build up planning capabilities at all levels and in all relevant sector x
departments
Attending to matters pertaining to human resource development and man-power x
Monitoring, maintenance and updating of infrastructure and equipment at PPS x
Evaluating the performance of institutions and enterprises engaged in economic activities x
Attending to matters pertaining to banking and financial institutions in relation to provincial development x
Formulation of strategies for economic development of NEP x
Monitoring GDP in NEP x
Coordinating activities pertaining to industrial promotion, agriculture development strategy, fisheries de- x
velopment, environmental issues, and transport
Formulating provincial nutritional plans and programmes x

Equipment

In order to make the above organisational structure operational, some equipment should be procured. While
current office equipment is largely adequate, transport is severely insufficient. Especially in view of a possi-
ble new understanding of the role of Planning Secretariat as service provider for sub-provincial planning
units, frequent travel to all eight districts in NEP is essential. Regular monitoring and support can only take
place while visiting the respective district offices, and when necessary, local level offices (Local Govern-
ment and divisions). The procurement of at least two new all-terrain vehicles is required.

Office equipment to be procured depends on the grade of computerisation desired. Currently, only higher
ranks in the organisational structure have personal computers. Lower ranks use a pool of computers when
the need arises. The meeting room at Planning Secretariat is too small to accommodate the staff. A handover
of another conference room (currently available on the same floor) to PPS would be appropriate and would
also make space for an additional office.

9.3.2 Individual skills

Recruitments

Recruitments for PPS should focus on two aspects: filling of key positions, and matching post and person.
Key positions to be filled are:

• a full-time head of the secretariat

• an adequate number of assistant directors to fill sub-units in planning
• an administration officer and a chief clerk to run all administrative business

Candidates for these and other positions need to be better scrutinised regarding their academic and profes-
sional background in order to avoid recruiting people who need intensive and extensive training because
they come from a completely different field. An example of inadequate criteria for selection is the fact that
there is not a single physical planner at PPS.

Trainings

A comprehensive training programme for PPS staff should be developed. The training programme should
look into all levels of staff and identify training needs, so that both individuals and the organisation benefit
from the effects of the training. Records should be kept for monitoring purposes as well as for the design of
annual training programmes. The monitoring has to focus on the impact of the training on the performance
on the job. Trainings without positive effects on the job should be discontinued. The programming of train-
ings has to be objective and has to address needs of all staff, avoiding favouring some members of staff and
neglecting others.

83
9.3.3 Supplementary organisational analysis

Despite the fact that many functions of Planning Secretariat are not being carried out, the staff seems to be
nevertheless busy with several activities. The assumption is that many of these activities are of an adminis-
trative or clerical nature. To understand the current operations in Planning Secretariat and identify possible
areas of intervention a supplementary organisational analysis is required. The analysis should focus on ad-
ministrative functions and tasks, financial aspects and clerical work carried out by the various members of
staff at Planning Secretariat.

9.4 LOCAL LEVEL

Capacity of planning units

As explained above, there are two main development agents at local level (in terms of planning and coordi-
nation): the Divisional Secretariats and the Local Governments (Pradeshiya Sabha, Urban Council, Munici-
pal Council). Both have planning units and neither has the capacity to prepare plans as explained in the in-
troduction to this report. However, the planning units at the Divisional Secretariats prepare annual plans,
which are compilation of project proposals that originate at grassroots level.

The weakness of these planning units is of a structural nature and will not be resolved easily, and certainly
not in the near future. For this reason we are of the opinion that the continuous attempts to strengthen plan-
ning capacities in both organisations will not lead to the desired result. We also see that the current con-
straints make it very difficult, if not impossible, to have these two amalgamated (in the sense that the Divi-
sional Secretariats become the administrative arm of the Local Governments).

Form our point of view, the only practicable (although temporary) solution to this situation is to bring the
planning units as close together as possible. Since planning processes involve many steps, it should be pos-
sible to have both planning units working as one while there is no conflict of interests. Plan preparation
could be one such step, especially since neither of the two has been preparing proper development plans. In
this context, capacity building could focus on skills for plan formulation of staff from both planning units.
With the objective of having one single comprehensive local development plan, the planning units of both
Divisional Secretariat and Local Government would build a team to lead the process of plan preparation.
The final decision should be with the elected council (where available). The idea is incidentally not new: a
Commission of Inquiry on Local Government Reforms suggested the same already in 1999: “The current
arrangement needs to be re-examined in order to bring about closer liaison between the Local Body and the
Divisional Secretariat to formulate a synthesized Local Development plan including the proposals tabulated
by both authorities operating in the area” (GoSL, 1999).

Another important aspect is the individual capacity of the planners in the planning units. Focusing on Local
Government organisations (PS, UC, MC), it is not necessary that their planners have all the knowledge and
skills required to actually formulate all sorts of plans. What the planners at this level need to know is what
kinds of plans are required, why and when such plans should be prepared, who could prepare the plans, and
how to make use of the plans (implementation). Urban physical development plans, for example, do not
need to (and cannot) be prepared by each Local Government since there is an organisation established for
precisely that purpose (Urban Development Authority). The role of the planners is to link up with UDA for
the preparation of a physical development plan, to oversee the process, and to represent the interests of the
local authorities. Nevertheless, planners at local level need to acquire the skills to formulate projects and
budgets for the implementation of devolved budgets.

Local councils

An intervention focusing on capacity building at local level should include the elected bodies, i.e. the coun-
cillors. In terms of planning, the local councillors have to be taken to a level where they are able to under-
stand planning processes and procedures, and to articulate the interests of the population. Furthermore, they
should be able to introduce planning committees when necessary and organise the operations of the council

84
in the most effective and efficient way. Transparency and participation, and good governance in general,
should be part of any programme to develop capacities amongst the council.

Coordination spaces

Within the process of plan formulation, coordination has a central role. Planning units should be prepared for
this, and adequate coordination spaces should be established. Proper coordination should try to involve all
stakeholders who have something to contribute to the plan formulation or who will be affected by the im-
plementation of the plan (negatively and positively). Real coordination has to be improved. Existing com-
mittees and meetings should be looked into and equally improved. The involvement of all development
agents at local level should be agreed on. This includes Divisional Secretariat, Local Government, sector
agencies, parastatals, NGOs, and the private sector (business community, organised population).

Information flow, databanks

To support the process of plan formulation, but also to strengthen the flow of information between levels and
between sectors, the systems of data collection and storage have to be improved. Computerised databanks
have to be established at all levels and the necessary equipment and personnel made available. Software
packages must be harmonised and a regular flow of information between databanks must be institutional-
ised. Data has to be constantly kept up to date and regularly submitted to other planning units.

Pilot LGs and DSs

The above recommendations should take place in all Local Governments simultaneously. However, in order
to closely monitor the implementation and quickly identify shortcomings, a few exemplary Local Govern-
ment areas should be selected.

Best practices

A method used already at provincial level, the identification and dissemination of best practices should be
done in the context of local governments. The best practices can be identified in various fields, be it good
governance in general, or more specifically in the promotion of the local economy, participatory processes,
transparency, accountability, environmental care, revenue generation, etc.

85
86
 10
CONSULTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Literature

Asian Development Bank, Institutional Strengthening of the Southern Provincial Council. Final Re-
port, Volumes 2 and 4, ADB, GoSL, Mandala Agricultural Development Corporation (MADECOR),
Resources Development Consultants Ltd., November 1998
Asian Development Bank, Sri Lanka Urban Development Sector Study, July 2000
Bastian, Sunil, The Control of State Land: The Devolution Debate, in: Bastian (ed.), Sri Lanka: The
Devolution Debate, 1998, pp. 61-86
Bigdon, Christine, Decentralisation, Federalism and Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka, South Asia Insti-
tute, Department of Political Science, University of Heidelberg, Working Paper No. 14, May 2003
Chief Secretary’s Office, NEPC, North East Province Post Tsunami Response Programme, Trinco-
malee, February 2005
Christiansen, Thomas, Regional Planning and GIS Consultancy for the Northern Rehabilitation
Project (NRP), Jaffna/Sri Lanka, GTZ Final Report, Colombo/Jaffna, September 2005
Development Studies Institute (University of Colombo) / South Asia Institute (University of Heidelberg),
Local Governance and Conflict Management in Sri Lanka, Final Report, February 2003
Disaster Management Centre, Road Map for Disaster Risk Management: Towards a Safer Sri
Lanka, Ministry of Disaster Management, Colombo, December 2005
District Disaster Preparedness and Response Plan, Ratnapura, April 2005
Finance Commission, The, Annual Report 2004, Colombo, 2005
German Development Cooperation, 2002, Disaster Risk Management: Working Concept, Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH, Eschborn, Germany, 2002
Government of Sri Lanka, Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Local Government Reforms, Co-
lombo 1999
Government of Sri Lanka, Regaining Sri Lanka, December 2002
Hettiarachchi, N.D., National Disaster Management Policy: Implications for Development, Colombo,
2004
Hofstede, Geert and Geert Jan Hofstede, Cultures and Organisations: Software of the Mind, New
York: MacGraw-Hill, 2005
Mendis, Willie, Contrast of Post-Independence Economic and Physical Planning at a Glance, De-
partment of Town and Country Planning, University of Moratuwa, 2003
National Disaster Management Centre, National Disaster Management Plan, Ministry of Women Em-
powerment and Social Welfare, Colombo, [no date]
National Physical Planning Department (NPPD) / Environment and Management Lanka (Private) Lim-
ited (EML), Eastern Province Physical Plan, [2004]
North East Provincial Council, Operational Information, Provincial Planning Secretariat, Trincomalee,
2004
Performance Improvement Project (PIP)/GTZ, Local Government Organisational Analysis, Consul-
tancy Report, August, Trincomalee, 2005
Rayner, Steve, Cultural Theory and Risk Analysis, in: Krimsky and Golding (eds.), 1992
Renn, Ortwin, The Social Arena Concept of Risk Debates, in: Krimsky, Sheldon and Dominic Gold-
ing, (eds.), Social Theories of Risk. Westport, Conn: Praeger, 1992, pp. 179-96.
Schwarz, Michiel and Michael Thompson, Divided We Stand: redefining politics, technology and so-
cial choice. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1990
Siddiqui, Kamal (ed.), Local Government in South Asia: A Comparative Study, Dhaka: University
Press Ltd., 1992
Sivalingam, K., Participatory Planning and Monitoring at Divisional/Local Level under Democratic
Decentralisation, Research Training Course Peace and Development Studies: Local Development in
Global Context, Department of Geography, University of Jaffna, 15th-19th Nov. 2004.
Sri Lanka Institute of Local Governance, Local Government System in Sri Lanka, No. 87, Colombo,
[no date]

87
 The World Bank, World Development Report 2003: Sustainable Development in a Dynamic World,
Washington D.C.: The World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003
United Nations Development Programme, Reducing Disaster Risk: A Challenge for Development,
Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery, New York, 2004 (available from www.undp.org/bcpr).
Urban Council Trincomalee, Programme Budget 2006

Laws

The Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (1978, plus amendments)

Housing and Town Improvement Ordinance (1915, plus amendments)

Land Development Ordinance (1935, plus amendments)
Urban Councils Ordinance (1987, original from 1940)
Municipal Councils Ordinance (1987, original from 1947)
Town and Country Planning Ordinance (1947, plus amendments)
Administrative Districts Act (1955)
Urban Development Authority Law (1978, plus amendments)
National Environmental Act (1980, plus amendments)
District Development Councils Act (abolished)
Provincial Councils Act (1987)
Pradeshiya Sabhas Act (1987)
Transfer of Powers (Divisional Secretaries) Act (1992)

Manuals and guidelines

Chief Secretary NEPC, Divisional Annual Implementation Programme from Year 2000 Under Local
Level Development Planning Process (North East Province), 1999
Chief Secretary NEPC, Unified Local Level Development Planning Procedure, 2006
Government of Sri Lanka / UNDP / MARGA Institute, Manual on Provincial and Divisional Planning,
[no date]
National Physical Planning Department, A Manual of Regional Planning, 2001
NEPC, Planning Procedure, 1999
Urban Development Authority / USAID, Planning Manual for local authorities, 1990

88

Annexe 1: List of interviews conducted
Level Organisation
National Ministry of Finance and Planning
Ministry of Nation Building and Development
Ministry of Urban Development and Water Supply,
National Physical Planning Department
Ministry of Provincial Councils and Local Govern-
ment
Ministry of Disaster Relief Services
Ministry of Regional Development
Finance Commission
Peredeniya University, Geography Department
Moratuwa University, Town and Country Planning
Centre for Ethnic Studies
Northern Rehabilitation Project (GTZ)
Tsunami Housing Support Project – THSP (GTZ)
Practical Actions (former ITDG)
Provincial Engineering Services and Infrastructure Depart-
ment
Local Government Department
Agriculture Department
Road Development Department
Department of Industries
Ministry of Health
Ministry of Education
Surveys Department
Department Rural Development
Legal Unit NEPC
Lands Department
Management Development Training Department
NEPC
Provincial Planning Secretariat
11
ANNEXE
Interviewee
Director General, Department of National
Planning, Mr Abeygunawardena
Senior Advisor, Mr Sivathasan
Director Department of Town and Country
Planning, Mr P.A. Vincent
Deputy Director Architecture, Mr Veranjan
Kurukulasuriya
Director Project Coordination and Program-
ming, Mr H.E.A.L Perera
Secretary, Mr Nordeen
Additional Secretary, Mr Illayapparachchi
Secretary, Mr Jayatillake
Director National Disaster Management Cen-
tre, Mr Hettiarachchi
Secretary, Mr P. Subasinghe
Director, Ms Bimba Gunatilake
Mr Asoka S. Gunawardena, Chairman
Professor Mookaiah
Senior lecturer, Mr Mahanama
Senior researcher, Mr Sunil Bastian
Senior Advisor, Mr Wolfgang Garatwa
Senior Advisor, Ms Hilke Ebert
Disaster Management, Mr Wjetunga
Integrated Urban Development Project, Mr
Rangapallawale
Deputy Chief Secretary, Mr Thavasilingam
Commissioner, Mr K. Sabapathippillai
Director, Dr Gnanachandran
Director Road Development, Mr Rajendra
Director, Mr Vishwalingam
Secretary Health, Mr LSC Siriwardena
Secretary, Mr R. Thiagalinkam
Director (Planning), Mr S. Saravanafavaan
Deputy Surveyor General, Mr ULD Piyasiri
Director, Ms Wijialudchumi Devendra
Duraiswamy
Mr P. Balavadivel, Legal Consultant
Mr A.M. Anif, Legal Officer
Provincial Land Commissioner, Mr R. Raveen-
thiram
Additional Secretary (Lands), Mr K. Parama-
lingham
Surveyor, Mr V. Sivagnanasundaram
Mr Krishnananthan
Chief Secretary, Mr Rangarajah
Deputy Chief Secretary Planning, Mr Croos
Deputy Director Planning, Mr Sivapiragasam
Deputy Director Planning, Mr Johnson
Deputy Director Planning, Mr Viswaruban
Deputy Director Planning, Mr Phelician
Research Assistant, Ms Marina
Development Assistant, Mr Muralitharan
89
 Performance Improvement Project (GTZ-PIP) Senior Advisor, Mr Walter Keller
Governance Advisor, Mr A. Jeyaratnam
Technical Advisor, Mr V. Mahendrarajah
Consultant, Mr Gerben Wijnja
Consultant, Mr Jan Bruinsma
District Urban Development Authority (UDA) Mr A Rajakaruna (Officer in Charge)
Mr MHV Rathna Kumar (Planning Officer)
National Housing Development Authority (NHDA) District Manager, Mr N. Therukumar
Regional Commissioner Vavuniya and Mannar Regional Commissioner, Ms T. Ramachandran
(Regional) Assistant Commissioner Local Gov- Local Government Assistant, Ms V. Phar-
ernment Vavuniya mavany
Community Development Officer (Vavuniya
North), Mr M. Sivagnanam
Community Development Officer (Vengala
Cheddikerlam), Ms Vajiba Junaid
Community Development Officer (Vavuniya),
Ms V. Kirubananda Sarma
NECORD Vavuniya Mr Kirupa Suthan
District Secretariat Vavuniya GA Vavuniya, Mr Shanmugan
Deputy Director Planning, Mr Paramakulasin-
gam
SEED, NGO Vavuniya Mr P.N. Singham, founder
District Surveys Office Superintendent, Mr K Dissanayake
Local Kinniya Pradeshiya Sabha Secretary, A.S.M. Mukthari
LG Assistant, A.R. Subair
Fin. Assistant, M.M. Fasheer
Divisional Secretariat Town & Gravets Trinco- Divisional Secretary, Mr Suntharam
malee Arumainayaham
Assistant Director Planning, Ms K. Vijai-
yathasan
Development Coordinator, Ms R. Leticia Sat-
keenaligams
Urban Council Trincomalee Chief Clerk, Mr Genesh
Accountant, Mr Palaraman
Internal Audit Officer, Mr Roshan Clementine
Divisional Secretariats Vavuniya, Planning Units Assist. Director Planning, Ms Praisoody
Assist. Director Planning, Ms Kirubasuthan

90
Annexe 2: Summary of provincial (i.e. devolved), reserved (i.e. Central Government) and concurrent
(i.e. joint) functions as stipulated in the Ninth Schedule to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution
(“List I”, “List II” and “List III”)

2a Provincial Council List

(Functions to be devolved to and carried out by the Provincial Councils)

Police and public order (unless in the Reserved List)

Planning (implementation of provincial economic plans)
Education and educational services (unless in List II or III)
Local Government (except for constitution, form and structure)
Provincial housing and construction (other than National Housing Development Authority)
Roads, bridges and ferries (other than national highways and bridges and ferries on national highways)
(Certain) Social services and rehabilitation
Transport (certain aspects)
Agriculture and agrarian services (mainly extension work)
Rural development (no further explanations)
Health (unless in List II or III)
Indigenous medicine
Resthouses under Local Government and circuit bungalows under “devolved departments”
Pawnbrokers (other than provided by banks)
Market fairs
Food supply and distribution
Cooperatives (also appears in List III)
Land (other than in List II or III)
Irrigation (other than in List II or III)
Animal husbandry (certain aspects)
Promotion, establishment and engagement in income-generating projects (unless contrary to Central Government in-
terests)
Reformatories, borstal institutions, etc.
Possession, transport, purchase and sale of intoxicating liquor
Burials, burial grounds, cremations and cremation grounds other than national memorial cemeteries
Libraries, museums, etc. controlled or financed by the Provincial Council
Ancient and historical monuments and records other than those of national importance
Regulation of mines and mineral development as defined by an Act of Parliament
(Certain) Corporations
Regulation of unincorporated societies and associations
Theatres, dramatic performances, music, cinema
Sports (other than national sports associations)
Betting and gambling (excluding taxation)
Provincial debt
Offences against statutes (in the context of this list)
Fees (in the context of this list)
Electrical energy other than power generated to feed the national grid
Borrowing of money as determined by an Act of Parliament
Taxation:
o Turnover taxes as determined by an Act of Parliament
o Betting taxes, taxes on prize competitions and lotteries (other than national lotteries)
o License taxes, liquor
o Motor vehicle license fees as determined by an Act of Parliament
o Dealership license taxes on drugs and other chemicals
o Stamp duties on transfer of properties such as land and motor cars
o Toll collections
o Court fines
o Fees charged under the Medical Ordinance
o Fees charge under the Motor traffic Act
o Departmental fees in the context of this list
o Fees under the Fauna and Flora Protection Ordinance
o Fees on lands alienated under the Land Development Ordinance and Crown Lands Ordinance
o Court fees
o Regulatory charges under the Weights and Measures Ordinance
o Land revenue (e.g. for valuation)
o Taxes on lands and buildings
o Taxes on mineral rights as determined by an Act of Parliament
o Other taxation as determined by an Act of Parliament

91
 Protection of the environment as determined by an Act of Parliament

2b Reserved List
(Functions to be carried out by Central Government)

National policy on all subjects and functions

Defence and national security; internal security; law and order
Foreign affaires
Posts and telecommunication; broadcasting; television
Justice in so far as it relates to the judiciary and the courts structure
Finance in relation to national revenue, monetary policy and external resources; customs
Foreign trade; inter-province trade and commerce
Ports and harbours
Aviation and airports
National transport (e.g. railways, national highways, etc.)
Rivers and waterways; shipping and navigation; maritime zones; State lands and foreshore
Minerals and mines
Immigration, emigration and citizenship
Elections (presidential, parliamentary, provincial councils, local authorities)
Census and statistics
Professional occupations and trainings
National archives; archaeological activities and sites and antiquities declared to be of national importance
All subjects and functions not specified in List I or List III

2c Concurrent List
(Functions to be carried out jointly by Central Government and Provincial Council)

Planning:
o Formulation and appraisal of plan implementation strategies at the provincial level
o Progress control
o Monitoring progress of public and private sector investment programmes
o The evaluation of the performance of institutions and enterprises engaged in economic activities
o The presentation of relevant data in the achievement of plan targets
o The dissemination of information concerning achievement of plan targets
o Publicity of implementation programmes
o Manpower planning and employment databank
o Nutritional planning and programmes
Education and education services (basically schools and personnel other than national schools and personnel of such
schools)
Higher education
National housing and construction: the promotion of integrated planning and implementation of economic, social and
physical development of urban development areas
Social services and rehabilitation (relief, rehabilitation and resettlement)
Agricultural and agrarian services (agro-linked industries, farms, soil conservation, plant pests)
Health (schools for training auxiliary medical personnel; supervision of private medical care, control of nursing
homes and diagnostic facilities; population control and family planning)
Registration of births, marriages and deaths
Renaming of towns and villages
Private lotteries
Festivals and exhibitions
Rationing of food and maintenance of food stocks
Cooperatives (also appears in List I)
Surveys (in the context of Lists I or III)
Irrigation (larger schemes)
Social forestry and protection of wild animals and birds
Fisheries other than beyond territorial waters
Animal husbandry (certain aspects)
Employment
Tourism
Trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of products with need of national control
Newspapers, books and periodical printing presses
Offences against statutes in the context of this list
Fees in the context of this list
Charity; religious institutions
Price control

92
Inquiries and statistics in the context of this list
Adulteration of foodstuffs and other goods
Drugs and poisons
Extension of electrification and regulation of use of electricity
Protection of the environment
Archaeological sites and remains other than national
Prevention of the extension of diseases between provinces
Pilgrimages

93