Is Local Governance in Nepal Strengthening? An Assessment of Temporal Performance Trends Using Local Government Institutional Capacity Self-Assessment (LISA) Scores

Abstract

A decade of political and administrative restructuring following the promulgation of new constitution in Nepal (2015); current post-federalization era necessitates the performance evaluation of local levels at their zenith. Considering the research gap in performance evaluation with respect to time and assessment points within the local level categories, this study examines the performance changes with respect to Local Government Institutional Capacity Self-Assessment (LISA) average scores in two assessment years. Number of local levels that participated in the LISA assessments in Fiscal Years (FY) 2022/23 and 2023/24 delimits the scope of this study. The significance of average score changes in two assessment years was analyzed across one hundred sectoral indicators. Similarly, ten respective sectors (dimensions), three evaluation grades, and a composite LISA national average also have been studied using General Linear Model (Multivariate) Analysis. The obtained results showed that most of the independent variables exhibited significant changes in the second assessment year compared to the previous year, whereas the change in the overall national average LISA score. Thus, the multivariate coefficient analysis of variables indicates numerical improvements but statistically mixed results. When considering the combined multivariate effects of all indicators, the overall institutional performance demonstrated a meaningful improvement over time. Thus, empirical evidences demonstrate that achieving institutional goals necessitates consistent performance beyond the heterogeneities at local levels, effective monitoring by higher authorities, ensuring that given responsibilities are fulfilled by the designated entities to sustain long-term local performance in Nepal.

Keywords

• Local governance
• Performance heterogeneity
• LISA Scores
• Decentralization
• Nepal

References

1. Acharya, K.K., (2018). Local governance restructuring in Nepal: From government to governmentality. Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology, 12(37-49). https://doi.org/10.3126/dsaj.v12i0.22178
2. Adhikari, H.P., (2023). Enhancing local governance in Nepal through federalism: A study of key elements. Journal of Nepalese Management Academia, 1(1), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.3126/jnma.v1i1.62027
3. Ancona, D., Gerardo, O., & Leslie, P., (2001). Taking time to integrate temporal research. Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 512-529.
4. Bhattarai, K.P., & Pokharel, B. (2022). Inclusive Governance at Local Level: A case study of local policy making process in Kirtipur Municipality, Tribhuvan University Journal, 37(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3126/tuj.v37i1.48057
5. Bhattarai, N. (2023). Implication of Local Government Institutional Capacity Self-Assessment System at Municipal Governance, NUTA Journal, 10(1-2), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.3126/nutaj.v10i1-2.62973
6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Dahal, G. (2021). Local governance in Nepal: A study of Machhapuchhre Rural Municipality, Kaski. Journal of Political Science, 21(31-38). https://doi.org/10.3126/jps.v21i0.35261
8. Ferlie et al. (1996). The New Public Management in Action, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

9. Fleischer, J., (2013). Time and Crisis. Public Management Review, 15(3), 313-329.
10. Goetz, K., & Jan, H.M.S., (2009). Political time in the EU: Dimensions, perspectives, theories. Journal of European Public Policy, 16(2), 180-201.
11. Government of Nepal. (2024). An introduction to Nepal (12th ed.). Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, Department of Information and Broadcasting, Kathmandu, Nepal, https://doib.gov.np/content/13195/nepal-identity-english-version/
12. Hood. C. (1991). A public management for all seasons. Public Administration, 69(3-19).
13. Hoyle, M.H. (1973). Transformations: An introduction and a bibliography. International Statistical Review/Revue Internationale de Statistique, 203-223.
14. Kandel, R., & Kattel, D. (2024). Study on performance effectiveness of judicial committees, Prashasan: The Nepalese Journal of Public Administration, 56(2), 48–68. https://doi.org/10.3126/prashasan.v56i2.75329
15. Kattel, D. (2025). Assessing Heterogeneity in Governance Outcome: Evidence from Local Government Institutional Capacity Self-Assessment (LISA) in Nepal. Industrial Policy, 5(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.61192/indpol.1570592
16. Kim, H.Y., & Timm, N.H. (2022). Univariate and multivariate general models: Theory and applications with SAS (2nd ed.). Routledge.
17. Kitson et al. (2004). Regional competitiveness: An elusive yet key concept? Regional studies, special issue on Regional Competitiveness, 38, 991-999.
18. Lee, D.K. (2020). Data transformation: A focus on the interpretation. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 73(6), 503-508.
19. Local Government Institutional Capacity Self-assessment. (LISA). (2020). Government of Nepal, Ministry of Federal Affairs and General Administration, Singhadurbar, Kathmandu. https://lisa.mofaga.gov.np/home
20. Local Government Operation Act. (LGOA). (2017). Government of Nepal, Ministry of Federal Affairs and General Administration, Singhadurbar, Kathmandu.
21. Matsumaru, Ryo & Kimio Takeya. (2015). Recovery and reconstruction: an opportunity for sustainable growth through ‘Build Back Better.’ Disaster Risk Reduction for Economic Growth and Livelihood: Investing in Resilience and Development, edited by Ian Davis, pp. 139-160. New York: Routledge.
22. Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector from schoolhouse to statehouse, City Hall to Pentagon. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
23. Porter, M.E. (2003). The economic performance of regions. Regional Studies, 36(6-7), 549-578.
24. Pudjono, A.N.S., Wibisono, D., & Fatima, I. (2024). Advancing local governance: A systematic review of performance management systems. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1).
25. Rivenbark, W.C., Roenigk, D.J., & Fasiello, R. (2017). Twenty years of benchmarking in North Carolina: Lessons learned from comparison of performance statistics as benchmarks. Public Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 130-148.
26. Rodríguez, P.A., & Gill, N., (2005). On the economic dividend of devolution. Regional Studies, 39(4), 405-420.
27. Rondo-Brovetto, P., & Saliterer, I. (2007). Comparing regions, cities, and communities: Local government benchmarking as an instrument for improving performance and competitiveness. The Innovation Journal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 12(3), 1-18.
28. Rubin, M., & John, B., (2023). Gender responsive budgeting: A budget reform to address gender equity. Public Administration, 101(2), 391-405.
29. Shahi, M.B., (2025). Assessing the culture of deliberation in local governance: Evidence from four municipalities in Kailali, Nepal. Far Western Review, 3(1), 170-190.
30. Smoke, P., (2015). Rethinking decentralization: Assessing challenges to a popular sector reform. Public Administration and Development, 35(2), 97-112.
31. Storper, M. (1997). The regional world: Territorial development in a global economy. Guilford Press, New York. Trital, N. (2024). Comparative analysis of institutional capacity self-assessment among local governments in Dhankuta. Journal of Research and Development, 7(1), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.3126/jrdn.v7i01.72502
32. World Bank Group., (2017). World development report, 2017: Governance and the law. World Bank Publications.
33. Yackee, J.W., & Susan, W.Y. (2021). The American state administrators project: A scholars’. Public Administration Review, 81(3), 391-405.
34. Yi, C., & Qiu, X. (2025). From local government to local governance: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 84, 102–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12644