Authors : Mohan Kumar Paudel; Ramchandra Baral

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 9 - September

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/35f2fpyv

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/3f9afr4e

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25sep1339

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : This study investigates the effectiveness of local governance in Kaski District, Nepal, by analyzing citizen perceptions across urban and rural municipalities. The research was based on two primary objectives, such as to examine citizens’ perceptions of service delivery, civic participation, and grievance mechanisms, and to analyze the variations in these governance practices between urban and rural settings and their implications for women’s representation. Employing a mixed-methods approach, data were collected from 111 respondents purposively selected across five local government units (Pokhara Metropolitan City, Madi, Annapurna, Machhapuchhre, and Rupa Rural Municipalities) through surveys, key informant interviews, and field observations. Findings reveal a significant urban-rural divide. Rural municipalities demonstrated higher citizen satisfaction, attributed to closer official-community ties, whereas the urban center struggled with bureaucratic inefficiencies. While grievance mechanisms were generally accessible, concerns over political favoritism were prevalent. Civic engagement was moderate but constrained for women by structural barriers like dual workloads, leading to a reliance on informal channels. The study concludes that effective local governance hinges not only on resources but on fostering inclusiveness, responsiveness, and trust. Strengthening genuine women's representation and ensuring equitable service delivery are crucial for achieving accountable governance.

Keywords : Governance, Local Governments, Citizen Perception, Service Delivery, Women's Representation, Urban-Rural Municipalities, Nepal.

References :

1. Acharya, K. K., & Zafarullah, H. (2018). Public service delivery in Nepal: Accountability and transparency challenges. South Asian Survey, 25(1–2), 34–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0971523118819973
2. Adhikari, G. (2025). Inclusion and exclusion: Dalit and marginalized participation in local government planning in Nepal. Historical Journal, 16(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.3126/hj.v16i1.76357
3. Adhikari, K., & Gellner, D. N. (2021). Clientelism and local governance in Nepal. Governance, 34(4), 957–975. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12564
4. Adhikari, R. (2014). Participation and representation in Nepal’s local governance: Challenges and prospects. Journal of Political Science, 14, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3126/jps.v14i0.14310
5. Adhikari, R. (2021). Social inclusion and grievance redress in Nepal’s local governance. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 6(2), 178–195. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057891120986629
6. Andrews, M., & Shah, A. (2005). Assessing local government performance in developing countries. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Series, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3624
7. Andrews, M., & Shah, A. (2005). Citizen-centered governance: A new approach to public sector reform. Public Administration and Development, 25(2), 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.349
8. Angius, V., & Van Thiel, S. (2024). Citizen satisfaction with arm’s-length bodies in local government: Expert insights on policy and practice. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 37(4), 748–767. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-01-2024-0015
9. Bhusal, T. (2023). Participatory local governance in rural Nepal: The primacy of informality. Development Policy Review, 41(6), e12724. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12724
10. Bostancı, B., & Erdem, N. (2020). Investigating the satisfaction of citizens in municipality services using fuzzy modelling. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 69, 100754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2019.100754
11. Bouckaert, G., Van de Walle, S., Maddens, B., & Kampen, J. K. (2020). Identity, trust, and responsiveness: Public management, governance, and citizen satisfaction. Public Management Review, 22(7), 917–935. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2019.1639191
12. Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework. European Law Journal, 13(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0386.2007.00378.x
13. Connerley, E., & Duncan, M. (2018). Decentralization and accountability in fragile states. World Development, 108, 174–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.03.001
14. Cornwall, A. (2008). Unpacking ‘participation’: Models, meanings and practices. Community Development Journal, 43(3), 269–283. https://doi.org/10.1093/cdj/bsn010
15. Fox, J. (2015). Social accountability: What does the evidence really say? World Development, 72, 346–361. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.03.011
16. Fox, J. A. (2007). The uncertain relationship between transparency and accountability. Development in Practice, 17(4–5), 663–671. https://doi.org/10.1080/09614520701469955
17. Gaventa, J., & Barrett, G. (2012). Mapping the outcomes of citizen engagement. World Development, 40(12), 2399–2410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.05.014
18. Gupta, A. K. (2021). Local development planning in Nepal: Does it actually reflect citizen participation? Journal of Management and Development Studies, 30(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3126/jmds.v30i1.36345
19. Hossain, N., Joshi, A., & Pande, S. (2023). The politics of complaint: A review of the literature on grievance redress mechanisms in the Global South. Policy Studies, 45(2), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2023.2193387
20. James, O., & John, P. (2007). Public management at the ballot box: Performance information and electoral support for incumbent English local governments. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 17(4), 567–580. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mul020
21. Joshi, A. (2017). Legal empowerment and social accountability: Complementary strategies toward rights-based development? World Development, 99, 160–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.07.008
22. Joshi, A., & Houtzager, P. P. (2012). Widgets or watchdogs? Conceptual explorations in social accountability. Public Management Review, 14(2), 145–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2012.657837
23. Lamsal, B. P., & Gupta, A. K. (2022). Citizen satisfaction with public service: What factors drive? Policy & Governance Review, 6(1), 78–89. https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v6i1.470
24. Lapuente, V., & Van de Walle, S. (2020). The effects of new public management on the quality of public services. Governance, 33(3), 461–475. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12470
25. Mansuri, G., & Rao, V. (2013). Localizing development: Does participation work? Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-8256-1
26. Mishra, C. (2019). Governance and accountability in Nepal: A review of challenges. Journal of Development Innovations, 3(2), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.3126/jdi.v3i2.27109
27. Ojha, H. R., Shrestha, K. K., & Subedi, R. (2022). Participation and deliberation in Nepal’s local governance: Insights from federal transition. Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 7(3), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/20578911211032783
28. Peixoto, T., & Fox, J. (2016). When does ICT-enabled citizen voice lead to government responsiveness? World Development, 79, 124–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.11.019
29. Romero-Subía, J. F., Jimber-del Río, J. A., Ochoa-Rico, M. S., & Vergara-Romero, A. (2022). Analysis of citizen satisfaction in municipal services. Economies, 10(9), 225. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10090225
30. Shrestha, A., & Poudel, K. (2019). Federalism and service delivery in Nepal: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Political Science, 19(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3126/jps.v19i1.26736
31. Smoke, P. (2015). Rethinking decentralization: Assessing challenges to a popular public sector reform. Public Administration and Development, 35(2), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1703
32. Smoke, P. (2015). Rethinking decentralization: Assessing challenges to a popular public sector reform. Public Administration and Development, 35(2), 97–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1703
33. Van de Walle, S., & Bouckaert, G. (2003). Public service performance and trust in government: The problem of causality. International Journal of Public Administration, 26(8–9), 891–913. https://doi.org/10.1081/PAD-120019352
34. Van Ryzin, G. G. (2007). Pieces of a puzzle: Linking government performance, citizen satisfaction, and trust. Public Performance & Management Review, 30(4), 521–535. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576300405
35. Van Ryzin, G. G. (2011). Testing the expectancy disconfirmation model of citizen satisfaction with local government. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(4), 599–611. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur034