Struggle of Local Governments with The Epidemic (4): An Integrated Policy is Necessary to Combat The Outbreak…

In our file titled “The Struggle of Local Governments with The Epidemic”, we discuss the civil society collaborations with local governments during the epidemic process after the applications of Istanbul, Izmir and Gaziantep Metropolitan municipalities.

Why did we start talking more about local governments and their practices in the COVID-19 process? The most important reasons for this are the fact that local administrations at the global and national level are the closest public institutions to the citizens, their units, and that they can develop good practice models for local needs much more quickly…

Thus, when we examine the precautions taken in the epidemic process in more than 10 world cities such as New York, Roma, Tokyo on the Institute Istanbul COVID-19 Research website (Enstitü İstanbul COVID-19 Araştırmaları web sayfasında) created by Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality, we can get an idea of how active and effective local governments are working.

So, how can the role sharing between the central and local governments and civil society actors and sometimes the competitive struggle be evaluated within the scope of the fight against the outbreak in Turkey?

Professor Dr. Emre Erdoğan summarizes the situation with the following words in his article “Coronavirus Days in Turkey: Thinking about the Concept of Governance in the Shadow of Despotic Leviathan” (Türkiye’de Koronavirüs Günleri: Despotik Leviathan’ın Gölgesinde Yönetişim Kavramını Düşünmek):

“Far away from the control of balance and supervisory systems… A government that does not need the suggestions of the opposition or non-governmental organizations can act fast… however… such governance focuses only on the result… and the exclusion of the opposition and other social elements in the process… contributes to political polarization. The central government’s halting of local initiatives such as donation campaigns, aid delivery services or hospital constructions in metropolitan cities held by the opposition has turned into a similar social differentiation. Following the lead of the central government may be the key to the success of a struggle on this scale, but the involvement of the opposition, local governments and non-governmental organizations in the decision-making process both ensures diversity in social priorities and leads to more effective implementation of the policies with consent. Most importantly, it would be possible to overcome the crisis situation in the long term by increasing both the capacity of the state and the capabilities of civil society.”

We’ve talked to Elif Avcı, the Head of Yerel-iz Association (Yerel-İz Derneği) (Local Monitoring Research and Application) which operates in the field of local government with the slogan “We Civilize Local Governments, We Localize Civil Society” about these statements made by an academic.

Similar to Prof. Dr. Erdoğan, Avcı considers collaboration between the local government, civil society and the private sector essential for an integrated outbreak fighting policy and calls on as follows: “Get involved in local civil networks. This period is not a process that we can overcome alone without solidarity.”

The Leading Role of Civil Society in Combating The Outbreak

How would you evaluate the capacity of local governments and civil society to combat the epidemic during Corona days?

In fact, these structures should be evaluated not only in terms of capacity, but over their use of potentials and their quick reaction skills. Even if it cannot compete with the central administration in terms of capacity and opportunities, civil society takes the lead in terms of adapting to the process and developing reactions. Central administrations were a bit inactive among the process, compared to the other two structures. Civil society transferred its work to digital very quickly during the epidemic and developed aid campaigns. Citizens’ initiatives very quickly started to establish first neighborhood-based and then province-based solidarity networks.

Support for people over the age of 65 and for other risky groups, which is currently made by the police or local government personnel on the subjects such as shopping, drug shopping, etc. was first initiated by the civil organizations. Then, civil administrations were followed by local governments. Civil society and local governments both developed services and inspired the central system in adapting efforts to raise awareness and adapting existing services to the needs arising from the COVID-19 outbreak. For example, the structure that first introduced the idea of psychological counseling line was a local government.

Do you agree as the head of an NGO working in a local government area that the anti-epidemic policies increase the tendencies towards centralization and authoritarianism? Otherwise, is it possible that networks of solidarity and democratic participation will increase?

The epidemic was actually a process that increased both. When we look at the communities struggling with COVID-19 worldwide, we see authoritarianism in the state wing. It is a fact that this epidemic has turned into something that strengthens centralization and authoritarianism in many countries and even increases the authority of some states. However, we also see that solidarity networks are rapidly developing and strengthening. Civilian organizations are filling the gaps among the world in many areas where the state lacks or where it cannot react quickly.

Local Administrations Are Capable Of Too Much, But They Lack Resources

What can both local governments and civil society actors do to combat COVID-19? What types of solidarity networks and practices can be developed locally?

There are many things that municipalities can do and develop in this area, but they are stuck with limited resources. For this reason, they can handle it by shifting budgets from other areas (annual budgets of other municipalities that are not currently active) or by donations. Therefore, it is important for central governments to allocate resources to municipalities and to support local governments in order to increase these good examples.

Actually, there is a lot that can be done. It is very important to increase social benefits and to define social aid groups well in this process. Local governments have developed many good practices such as handling the grocery shoppings of people who cannot leave their houses who are among the risk group as well as the announcement of the call centers for solidarity against the increasing cases of violence, food aid for those in need, feeding of street animals and providing temporary accommodation for the homeless.

The support of Ankara Metropolitan Municipality for cleaning workers or the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality defining street musicians among social aid groups can be shown as good examples.

Apart from social benefits, municipalities have a great responsibility to produce content in distracting people from the bad mood of staying too much at home. Gaziantep Metropolitan Municipality has developed a system that makes people exercise in their balconies by sending sports coaches to the neighborhoods. Similarly, there are municipalities that have developed concepts such as home exercising, culture and arts at home through digital platforms.

Municipalities started to produce disposable masks after the necessity of wearing masks in public transportation and markets. For example, Konya Metropolitan Municipality has turned the vocational courses into mask production areas, enabling these venues that had taken a break to adapt to the process.

In my opinion, during the epidemic, civil actors can relate whatever they can do with this process. We see good examples of this as well. There is a rapid civil society in Turkey in developing reflexes on social events. Currently, many associations, foundations and civil initiatives find online solutions to carry out their activities. Currently established networks evolve into neighborhood solidarity, or solidarity networks emerge when neighbors find each other and organize on social media. There are many structures that fill out social assistance applications for beneficiaries who do not have access to the internet or who do not have digital literacy, ranging from preparing and distributing aid packages, to those providing free psychological Support, from going shopping for the elderly of the neighborhood to developing online activities for children who stay at home. Fortunately, there is. It is very important to support these structures.

“Local Governments Analyze The Risks Faster”

How prepared are the local governments and NGOs in Turkey in general for such crisis situations? How would you evaluate them both in terms of legislation and capacity (financial, technical, administrative)?

I think we got caught off guard, but our adaptation speed is not bad. The digital literacy of both local governments and civil society has increased rapidly. While those who adapt to this process shine out, we experience that those who do not adapt become invisible.

Although local governments were shifting their financial capacities to social benefits, they had announced donation campaigns because they had difficulty meeting the demand. Unfortunately, these calls were interrupted by the central government. However, local governments are public units where the state is closest to the public. They are able to achieve the need of the local and develop good practice models much faster. They can also solve service planning and logistics processes much faster in areas such as social aid distribution etc.

For this reason, the state needs to provide general assistance such as unemployment benefits, deferred debts from the center, and directly support local governments in processes such as household-based social aid distributions, and strengthen local areas through local governments. While local governments also plan and carry out this process, an integrated epidemic policy can be implemented only by cooperating with civil society organizations and the private sector and by involving them in the process.

Could you give an example of the successful practices of municipalities in cooperation with NGOs and citizens in the fight against COVID-19 in Turkey?

The first example that comes to my mind is the 3D Support Movement. We see how a call from social media to the owners of 3D printers to design shields for healthcare workers can create a precedent for municipal, civil society, citizens and private sector collaboration.

Can you make an evaluation between local governments in Turkey and in the world with a comparative approach? How would you evaluate the local government practices of the city you live in?

Before making this comparison, it is necessary to consider the differences between the jurisdictions of local governments. In some countries, local governments can take critical decisions such as interruption of education quickly on their own initiative, whereas in central countries such as Turkey decisions that would be taken from the center have to be the determinant of the process.

However, in general, it is possible to say that local governments stand at a point that directs the public and central administrations in this sense by analyzing the effects of COVID-19 on the society and the risk it poses more rapidly. For example, it seems that the New York Mayor and Trump administration have been at the head of the process with warnings, up-to-date data sharing and information since the days when they were far from realizing the seriousness of the COVID-19 situation.

In Turkey, we have seen in time how to the point was Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu’s call for increasing measures since the beginning of the process.

We should say that this is not a coincidence, as local governments are the first points of contact for local people’s needs and are the first to be aware of the dynamics of the local community. In this process, the central government has to take the demands of local governments into account by respecting the social state principle so that the public can get through the process with least damage. 

“The Outbreak Is Not A Process We Can Overcome Without Solidarity”

What do you foresee to happen in the local after COVID-19?

Right now we are all focused on survival and meeting acute needs, but when this period ends, we will be able to see the impact this epidemic has had on us. People question their consumption needs, the areas they live in, and their trust in the state and in local governments. This period has reminded us of our global vulnerability. It seems that this vulnerability will be examined more.

Is there anything you would like to add?

We all have a lot to do in the fight against Covid-19. Beyond things like trying to stay at home or paying attention to social distance, we must advocate for the increase of good examples in this area through our organizations if we are involved with an organization, or individually if we are not organized. For this reason, you should speak up, write and request your municipality to develop good examples in your local area as well. Repeat these requests to the central government outside your municipality. Get involved in civil networks in your neighborhood. This period is not a process that we can overcome alone without solidarity. However, in solidarity, we will have the chance to circumvent this process in the most undamaged way, and only in this way it will be possible to maintain our well-being.