The Evaluation of the Drafting Process of Regional’s Development Strategies in Albania. the Research on Gjirokastra’s Region

Introduction

The most important goal for any government is to enable the development of the country and to increase the welfare of its citizens by means of state policies at local and national level (Bejko 2015, p.19). In this context the use of strategic planning concepts in the design of policies is crucial, so as to enable a sustainable economic and social development of the regions and the whole country. Alongside development strategies at the national level developed by the government, central institutions in the sustainable development of the country have an undisputed role in the Regional Development Strategies (RDS). These important documents define the main directions in the development of the regions and the priorities according to each area and sector based on the competitive advantages of each region. For these strategies to reach their goals it is absolutely necessary that they be coordinated and coherent with national and sectional strategies. This is the only way to enable a significant reduction of disparities in the development of regions throughout the country and of course a balanced economic and social development across the country. It is high time that regional development and its policies were seen in a new dimension in Albania based not only on the need for more economically developed regions but on a need to be integrated in the EU structures as well.

Taking into account the indispensable role that RDS's, have in the national development of a country there have been attempts to design RDS in the 12 regions in Albania since 2005. Although there might be discussions on how these strategies are created and on their quality, it should be noted that it was a brave effort that produced 12 regional development strategies that can and should be improved over time in relation to changing conditions, to better serve the development in specific regions and the country in general.

The District of Gjirokastra was the first in Albania who managed to formulate its strategy of regional development with the assistance of UNDP. The District Council in Gjirokastra as the local government unit of the second level, namely in 2005 approved the Regional Development Strategy of the District of Gjirokastra (DSDGJ) using the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), as the foundations for domestic policy that would ensure a sustainable regional development. With the passing of years this strategy was due to adapt to reflect the changes in economic and social conditions in the region and to be better adjusted with the policies and strategies of development.

1. The General Context of Regional Development in Albania and the Role of RDS-S

Nowadays the concept of development is considered to be multi-dimensional (Civici 2009, p.4). Besides economic growth, it brings social welfare, changes in the quality of the workforce, better organization of society, better functioning of the institutions, namely the evolution of society as a whole. Development means urbanization, industrialization, education, professionalism, knowledge and wealth accumulation so that human needs are better met.

Worldwide central and local governments, the private sector and civil society continuously look for the right way to promote local economic development as a cornerstone for a sustainable development of the country. Many economists try (Stimpson, et al. 2006, p.4) to maximize economic profit, rather than to seek new approaches to achieve sustainable economic development, which will generate more benefits for people and businesses in the community. Temali (2002) links the concept of economic development with the community's economic development, which according to him does not simply mean to put up buildings and businesses, but it also means to develop your talents, skills, improve the lifestyle of people living in these buildings, of the owners of these businesses and of the people who are their customers. Development means helping the community to grow, helping people live better as individuals and as a community (Temali 2002, p.2).

Stimson, et al. (2006) referring to Blakely (1994) defines regional economic development as: a process in which local governments and the community engage in order to promote business activities and employment. The main goal of local economic development is economic development that promotes employment opportunities in sectors which improve the community by using existing human, natural and institutional resources (Stimson, et al. 2006, p.5).

The term region is widely used not only in literature, but also in daily life mainly in the vocabulary of people who deal with drafting policies, or public officials at all levels. Considered at national level the regions of a country are divided in such a way that areas within a region have similar economic, cultural, social and climatic characteristics. EC defines the region as "land surface with more or less defined boundaries, which often serve as an administrative unit of the state" (Cardiff University 2005, p.10). In the Albanian legislation, the term region is generally equivalent to that of the county.

Regional development policies have undergone significant transformations during the last 5 decades. The traditional planning model in many developing countries, considered regional planning as one of the strategic planning components of the state. During the past three decades, the current global situation has caused this concept to be redefined and rebuilt (Mercado 2003).

The Albanian Parliament approved the resolution in support of the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in July 2003, “... encouraging partners to regularly monitor the progress made in achieving the MDGs, through national systems of evaluation, monitoring and the preparation of annual reports, which encourage public discussion and offer recommendations on ways to improve regional policies and national development. "After setting the MDGs for Albania, objectives and indicators used to measure progress and degradation within regional and local levels of the National Strategy for Economic and Social Development, the process of drafting the RDS's has begun in all Regional Councils since 2003. To assist you in this process, the Ministry of Economy published Manual for the design of RDS's in December 2003.

In each region work began with the drafting of the Regional Reports, in which a full analysis of the current situation in the region was performed and development opportunities for each sector were identified. These regional indicators subsequently served as the basis for drafting the RDS's.

With the help of UNDP, WB, SIDA, and SNV, RDSs were drafted in the 12 regions in Albania in 2005, which had been approved by the respective county councils. These development strategies were conceived as a combination of regional interests on the one hand and of political commitments on the other hand at national and international level. Underlying these strategies are the MDGs and all policies at local level should aim at achieving these objectives. Generally the main objectives of these strategies are sustainable development and improving the quality of life for the communities, poverty alleviation, improving education, improving health care, encouraging the development of small and medium businesses, sustainable environment and better governance. RDS-regional reports in Albania were produced through an interactive and participatory process, which included local institutions, regional and national civil society organizations, international partners, citizens and their communities.

Among the nine MDGs in each of the counties in Albania the objectives selected were those considered as more important given the specifics of particular regions. E.g. the county of Gjirokastra has selected five goals, which have been evaluated as priorities among all the problems the region faces.

Since improving development strategies in relation to changing conditions is very important so as development strategies are coherent, it has been noted that there have been attempts by some counties to update their development strategies e.g. The Regions of Lezha and Shkodra presented new development strategies in 2010, "Regional Development Concept", Lezha region and "Regional Development Strategic Concept" of Shkodra, both with support from the German foundation GTZ and with local and international advice. These documents determine the priorities of development in the District of Lezha and Shkodra and at the same time they determine the action plans, enforcement measures, performance indicators and costs of implementing these strategies.

Even the district of Tirana presented the main directions of its development in 2012 in the act: "Regional Development Concept for the District of Tirana 2012-2017", a document which was drafted with the support of the Albanian Foundation for Local Capacity Development. Although a very good job has been done in this document for the presentation of the current situation regarding the economic and social development in the district of Tirana, we notice that the definition of strategic priorities of development for the District of Tirana, is not accompanied by action plans, by the definition of indicators that will be assessed and not even by a detailed analysis of the costs that will accompany the implementation of this strategy and the planned funding sources.

In a study conducted by UNDP in 2010 related to the regional disparities in Albania it is mentioned that Inter-regional disparities in terms of economic development are still evident. Therefore economic growth calculated by the GDP over the last decade has been unequally distributed in high concentration in the region of Tirana and Durres. Tirana generates about 36% of the total GDP, while it represents only 10% of the active population of the country. GDP differences among regions are very high.

Even in terms of employment figures differentiation between regions has been quite high. Internal migrating movements from the less developed regions to developed ones such as Tirana and Durres has caused deterioration in the employment figures in the eligible counties. Access to water is still a problem: about a quarter of the population has no access to the water supply system. Significant disparities are also noticed among circuits in infrastructure access. Jano (2012) states that Albania does not only have the lowest level of GDP per capita among all member states and candidate countries to the EU, but also its regional disparity has been enhanced by socio-economic structures, inherited infrastructure, the latest developments, massive migration, and by the lack of appropriate, effective development policies to address issues of regional cohesion (Jano 2012, p.5).

Reports between RDS and NSDI sector strategies should be dual. On the one hand NSDI and sector strategies must be appropriately focused on the development of the territory and on the other hand the identified problems and proposed actions on regional strategies should find their position in the action plans according to the sectors. The latter seems not to have really happened. After seeing the development strategies in the 12 regions of the country we notice that the problems identified in these strategies, in very few cases have been given due importance by being included in national and sector development strategies. This has probably happened because it is difficult to regard RDS as a reference point because of the long time that has passed since the moment of their development, during which these strategies must absolutely be improved and adapted, (which in most cases has not happened) in terms of the evolution of society, the new needs, changes in environmental conditions and the generation of new requirements for the integration of the country in the EU.

In the Progress Report on Albania in 2013 it is recommended that in connection to the programming, administrative capacities must be considerably strengthened, so as to be able to develop and implement realistic policies and strategies. The development of priority projects remains an important issue to be addressed, particularly in connection to the future EU assistance within IPA 2 (KE Progress Report Albania 2013, p.46).

In Albania it is difficult to identify a comprehensive policy framework which addresses all priorities: economic ones, social ones, and security ones, those regarding institutional development of regional and European integration of the country. We have a policy framework often characterized by a large number of strategies, priorities, objectives and initiatives, which often overlap or are repeated and most of them are programmed, implemented, monitored and reported separated from each other. Despite the fact that most of these initiatives are successful, it seems that the country lacks a unified vision and a unique national strategic framework, which above all should integrate the process of European integration with priorities of national development (Meksi 2004, p.25).

The results of the study conducted by UNDP regarding regional disparities in Albania showed that: the country has not effectively applied a policy of regional development. Bilateral relations between regional development and decentralization have not been analyzed and assessed, and truly there is no consensus as to which level regional development policies will be implemented. There has been little progress in implementing the RDCS and its prospects are questionable (Girejko 2010, p.26).

2. An Evaluation on the Process of Drafting the Regional Development Strategy in the District of Gjirokastra (RDSGJ)

Despite the positive efforts that have been made in Albania in terms of drafting the Regional Development Strategies, many conducted studies have identified significant problems in the implementation of these strategies. From conversations conducted with focus groups to identify these problems and to find solutions, it was concluded that one reason may have been the poor quality of the strategy that has led precisely to the lack of commitment from public institutions of local government units in terms in its implementation. Namely to assess the RDSGJ drafting process a study was undertaken that basically had to estimate how this process has been going and if there were any problems that may have affected the quality of the strategy.

Methodology of the Study

In the second part of this paper some results will be presented in relation to the process of drafting the RDSGJ, results that are part of a full study carried out in connection with the drafting and implementation of RDSGJ and the problems encountered in this process. The main problem mentioned in this study is the analysis of RDSGJ drafting process, identifying the problems that have accompanied this process in order to try and make the necessary improvements to this strategy thus not remain just a document in the archive, but to actually contribute in the develop of the region. So as to get a more complete evaluation of the situation, it was thought that the questionnaire should be used as a research instrument. It was designed to collect the information needed. In order to achieve the objectives of the research the questionnaire was compiled which was conceived in two different sections to be completed by two different groups of interviewees.

• The first section of the questionnaire, from which information could be collected on the process of drafting the RDS, would be filled by people who had participated in this process. Since the number of these people was small 40 people, it was thought that this part of the questionnaire should be distributed to everyone.

• The second section of the questionnaire, aimed at gathering information on the drafting process of the strategy only by the expert group which was a total of 6 people. This group was deliberately considered because it could identify any problem that may have negatively affected the quality of the strategy.

The geographic area where the study was conducted was the county of Gjirokastra, with its three districts of Gjirokastra, Tepelenë and Permet. Questionnaires were distributed via direct contact with people and a very small number of questionnaires were distributed in electronic form. The review, processing and data analysis of the research was conducted using the program SPSS IBM Statistics version 21.

Study Results

The analysis of demographic indicators for the first section of the questionnaire (Table 1) from a total of 34 interviewees shows that: only one in 34 (2.9% of the interviewees) were aged 25-30 years, which makes the assessment it has provided controversial about the process of drafting the strategy. Taking into account that the other 33 interviewees or 97.8% of the interviewees are over the age of 31 years, it is evaluated that the results of this questionnaire, at least in terms of age criteria will be valid.

Although selective sampling was used in this survey we tried to assess the level of information that respondents had about the process of drafting the strategy. Since it was drafted nine years ago and we are conscious of the personnel changes that have happened in public administration, this information was considered important for us. Calculating the results (chart 1), we note that only 14.7% of the interviewees have average information about this process, while 85.3% of the interviewees have very good information about this process. Thus it is believed that the information gathered will be very useful to us.

Based on the discussions that took place in the focus groups the problem of high impact that UNDP had in the process of initiation and development of the strategy was identified. This influence was reflected in the content of the RDS, the objectives of which were built based on the MDGs. The following question was included in this questionnaire: "Who initiated the process of drafting the regional development strategy?” We have the following results: 44.1% of the interviewees think that the district of Gjirokastra needed a development strategy, 26.5% of the interviewees think that there was a need to improve the old strategy of development and 23.5% think that there was a wish to adapt RDS to NSSED and 8.8% of the interviewees stated that it was UNDP that initiated this process.

Judging that the quality of the strategy is directly related to the quality of the working group dealing with its design, the interviewees were asked about the selection of the members of this group. From the results we notice that: all interviewees had information on the composition of the working group, 15 out of 34 interviewed did not know how the members of the working group were selected, while the answers of the other 19 people who had information regarding the selection of the members of the working group were spread between the Chairman of the County Council and County Council. There were also answers that did not yield any useful information on this question.

At the same time they were asked about the assessment they had on the composition of the working group that dealt with the drafting of the strategy. 23.5% of them felt that the group was completed with specialists from all fields, 38.2% felt that the working group was partially completed with specialists from all fields, 38.2% thought that the working group had a lack of specialists from all fields.

From the evaluation that the interviewees made how positive was the impact of the composition of the working group on the quality of the strategy (see Chart 2), the results show that only 29.3% assess it to be over the average (positive, very positive), while the rest 67.6% rate it as average or low, and 2.9% did not provide any valid response.

Based on these results we can judge that the absence of specialists from all fields in the working group is an indicator that has damaged the quality of the strategy.

Two questions are used to assess the quality of the strategy in the questionnaire: "At what level do you evaluate the quality of the strategy?" and "At what level do you think the priorities set in the strategy reflect the most problematic issues in our region?” This is done in order to assess how careful and considerate are the respondents while filling in the questionnaire. From their answers (Table 2) we see that the average answers are as follows:

It is noted that the evaluations of the quality of RDSGJ are very close to the average assessment. To statistically assess how important these averages are the T-test is used, from which we see that with a 99.9% confidence interval, these estimated averages are important.

Since the evaluation for the first variable “strategy quality " is regarded with a slight positive tendency, and there is a little negative tendency for the second variable in order to give a fairer evaluation, the coefficient of variation is calculated for both variables:

V = (Standart Deviation / Average) x100

Note that v₁ = 31.3 and v₂ = 29.5, which indicates that the second variable "To what extent do priorities reflect the issues of the region", has a lower coefficient of variation, so the data have a greater homogeneity in relation to the variable “strategy quality ". This argument shows that the priorities defined in the strategy averagely reflect, with a slight negative tendency, the problems in our region. In conclusion it could be said that this strategy is assessed to be of average quality with a low tendency to negativity.

In order to gather information about the interviewees’ opinion on other problems that exist in our region that should be reflected in the strategy, they have identified as the most important ones: the problems of tourism development, the problems of agriculture and problems of regional economic development (Table 3).

In view of assessing the strategy, information was collected from a group of experts who dealt with the drafting of the strategy.

At first, information was requested in connection to this process from the County Council of Gjirokastra which was the institution responsible for this strategic document. From the information obtained it was confirmed that the process of drafting the strategy had proceeded normally. It began with the appointment of the expert group that would lead the process, then several working groups were created with regional specialists, from the prefecture and public administration that would work to gather the necessary information in order to analyze the current situation (at the time) to identify where the problems were and after that to define the priorities of regional development. After this information was collected and processed, the priorities set in advance were discussed with all interest groups. Their thoughts and suggestions were reflected in the final draft of the strategy which specified the levels of the main objectives that had to be achieved as well as the programs that would be undertaken in order to apply the strategy. According to the regional council the process had been participating, and the priorities set in the strategy were discussed in advance with all interest groups and their consensus was obtained.

Information was taken from the expert group to get a second assessment on the progress of this process. From a total of six members we were able to obtain this information only by four of them. In the information collected we sometimes deal with contradictory answers e.g.: they admit that they had experience in designing strategies, while two experts confess they have not received the necessary training to engage in this process, another expert admits being trained for this . At the same time they accept that the old strategy of the regional council served as a reference document in this process also the UNDP has consistently advised this process.

Question: "Do you think that the working group includes appropriate experts to design a development strategy?” two of them think that the group was partially complete with the appropriate specialists to design a development strategy. They admit having had problems in the process of strategy designation and they list these problems as follows:

• Lack of training or inadequate training

• Great lack of information

• Lack discussions in the interest groups

• Lack of logistical infrastructure

• Lack of support specialists

• The impact of politics on the determination of development priorities

At the same time they believe that their opinions were greatly regarded in the final document.

Based on this information, considering the fact that this part of the questionnaire aims to collect information on a process carried out 9 years ago, and while the focus of this questionnaire is a group of experts, the assessment of the effectiveness of the process of drafting a strategy really does present difficulties. However, we consider that if the effectiveness of this process was high, it would produce a good strategy to implement the requirements of interest groups and would be under continuous pressure from these groups to assess the progress made in achieving the objectives. This was not observed in the years that followed the drafting of the strategy. On this basis we can say that this process has been lukewarm and the strategy has not realized the expectations of the interest groups. This is proved by the results of the first section of the questionnaire related to the assessment that the interviewees had on the quality of the regional development strategy, where the strategy is estimated at average level.

Conclusions and Recommendations

The country's economic development can be achieved by coordinating public policies at the national level with national policies on regional and local level. In this context the role that regional development strategies have in the sustainable development of the country, is very important.

Despite being a condition for the overall development of the country regional development in Albania despite is also a must to integrate into EU structures. In this context, our country still has much to do to bring regions on a uniform development like the EU.

The drafting process of RDSGJ was an inclusive process during which the development priorities of the region were defined in full coherence with the MDGs. The absence in the working group, which dealt with the design of DSDGJ and with the specialists from all areas, is an indicator that has damaged the quality of the strategy.

Analyzing the results, RDSGJ is estimated of average quality with a low tendency to negativity. In this context it could be said that this document does not meet the expectations of interest groups. Therefore under these circumstances it is important to make the necessary changes to the strategy so as to be more coherent and serve the region's development as much as possible. Research showed that 3 important regional problems need to be reflected in this strategy: tourism development problems, the problems of agriculture, and problems of regional economic development.

The study showed that there have been some problems in the process of drafting the DSDGJ, among which we mention: lack of training or insufficient training of the working group, great lack of information, lack of discussions in the interest groups, lack of logistical infrastructure, lack of support specialists, political influence in determining the development priorities etc.

RDSGJ has already lost its value as a strategic document for the development of our region because of the fact that its term is ending, but also because of the fact that the priorities set in this strategy should be reconsidered in relation to economic, social, political and demographic development that have occurred during these eight years since its approval. Under these circumstances based on the previous experience the District of Gjirokastra should definitely start work on drafting the new development strategy in accordance with the requirements of the time.

It should be borne in mind that the process of drafting a new development strategy for the region of Gjirokastra, should be more partaking in order that all interest groups can accomplish their expectations for the new strategy. This will make them more active in the process of implementing the strategy.

References

Tables

Table 1. The distribution of the interviewees by age

Table 2. Calculation of averages for variables that assess the quality of the strategy

Table 3. Problems that should be reflected in the RDSGJ

Figures

Chart 1: Level of information about the process of drafting the RDS

Chart2: How positive was the impact of the composition of the working group on the quality of the strategy

Appendixes

Questionnaire

Section I: The process of drafting a regional development strategy.

This is a questionnaire to be filled in by the County Council clerks or former clerks, and other individuals who have helped in the drafting of RDSGJ.

1. What Is Your Age:

1. 30-40 years old 2. 25-30 years old 3. 40-50 years old 4. Over 50 years

2. What Is Your Profession? ________________________________

3. How much information do you have about the process of drafting the regional development strategy for the District of Gjirokastra?

1. A lot 2.Enough 3.Average 4.A little 5. Not at all

4. Do you have any information on who initiated the process of drafting the Regional Development Strategy for Gjirokastra:

1. The need there was for a development strategy in Gjirokastra

2. The need for improving the old strategy of development

3. The request to adapt the regional development strategy with the National Strategy for Economic and Social Development.

4. Other_____________________________________________

5. I do not know

5. Do you have information on the composition of the working group that drafted the District Development Strategy?

1. Yes 2. No

6. Do you have any information on the election of members of the working group? (Specify) _________________________________________

7. What Is Your Opinion Regarding the Working Group

1. The group was completed with specialists of all fields

2. The working group was partially completed with specialists of all fields

3. The working group lacked specialists of all fields

4. I do not know

8. Do you think that the composition of the working group has had a positive impact on the design of the strategy?

1. Very positive 2.Positive 3.Average 4.Somewhat positive. 5.I do not know

9. At What Level Do You Evaluate the Quality of This Strategy?

1. Very good 2. Good 3.Average 4.Poor 5. Very poor

10. At what level do you think the priorities set in the strategy reflect the most problematic issues in our region?

1. Very high 2. High 3. Average 4. Low 5. Very Low

11. In your judgment what other problems should be better reflected in the strategy?

1. Problems of regional economic development

2. Problems of agriculture

3. The problems of development of mountainous areas

4. Problems of transportation

5. Tourism development problems

6. Transnational cooperation

7. The quality of public services

8. Environmental pollution

9. Treatment of urban waste

10. Problems of unemployment

11. The problems of urban planning

12. Food safety problems

13. Social problems

14. The problems in the education sector

15. The problems in the health sector

16. Issues related to business development

17. The preservation of cultural monuments

18. The problems of water supply and sanitation

19. Other ____________________________________

Section II: The process of drafting a regional development strategy.

A questionnaire for the group of experts that has been in charge of drafting the Regional Development Strategy for Gjirokastra 2007-2013.

1. What Is Your Age:

1. 25-30 years old 2. 30-40 years old 3. 40-50 years old 4. Over 50 years old

2. What Is Your Profession? ________________________________

3. Do You Have Experience in Drafting Development Strategies?

1. A lot 2.Sufficient 3. Average 4 Little 5.Not at all

4. Have You Received Proper Training to Engage in This Process?

1. Yes 2. No

5. If yes, how much did this training help in the drafting of the regional development strategy

1. A lot 2.Sufficient 3.Average 4. Little 5.Not at all

6. Have you had any reference document that served as a basis in this process?

1. Yes 2. No

7. If so Which One Was It?

1. National Strategy for Economic and Social Development

2. Old County Strategy

3. Strategies developed by other regions in Albania

4. Other (specify) _____________________________

8. Do you think that the working group was composed of the appropriate experts to design a regional development strategy?

1. Totally 2.Partially 3. Not at all

9. What Was Your Motivation in This Process?

1. The development of new knowledge

2. Positive contribution to the development of my region

3. Financial incentives

4. Exchanging views and experiences

5. Other (specify) ________________________

10. How Motivated Were You in the Process?

1. Very much 2. Enough 3. Average 4. Little 5. Not at all

11. If You Did Not Feel Motivated, What Were the Reasons for This?

1. You were not free to express your professionalism

2. You did not feel financially motivated

3. You did not have the right information to design a strategy

4. Your thoughts were not taken into account

5. You were constantly pressured to make certain choices

6. The work group did not meet your expectations

7. There was not enough time to judge objectively

8. Other ______________________________________

12. Did You Come Across Setbacks in the Process of Drafting the Strategy?

1. Yes 2. No

13. If Yes, What Were These Setbacks?

1. Lack of training or inadequate training

2. Poor communication within the working group

3. Weak support by the regional council

4. Significant lack of information

5. Strong reactions from interest groups

6. Lack of discussions with the interest groups

7. Lack of seriousness by the members of the working group

8. Lack of logistical infrastructure

9. Lack of support specialists

10. Poor coordination between governments (county, municipal, municipality)

11. Bureaucratic obstacles in collecting information

12. Political influences on the presentation of the situation

13. Political influences on determining the priorities of development

14. Other (please specify) ________________________________

15. How Much Were Your Thoughts Reflected in the Final Document

1. Very much 2. Enough 3.Average 4. Little 5.Not at all