Receive free War in Ukraine updates
We’ll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest War in Ukraine news every morning.
The writer is director of the OECD’s Centre for Entrepreneurship, SMEs, Regions and Cities
Ukraine’s mayors have played a crucial role in the country’s resistance, empowered by far-sighted reforms implemented a decade before the conflict. They must now be positioned to lead the reconstruction effort within their communities.
Ukraine began strengthening its subnational structures nearly a decade ago, granting new powers and responsibilities, and funding, to nearly 1,500 municipalities. Six years into the reform process, on the eve of the Russian invasion, decentralisation was bearing fruit: local public services had improved, along with local capacity to drive change.
A recent OECD report shows that Ukraine’s newly empowered subnational governments have become key players in the war effort. First, they have turned the skills, structures and infrastructure created by reforms to new uses. For example, an administrative service centre in the Odesa oblast created a call centre to provide citizens with information on where to find food, shelter and medical assistance.
Second, Ukraine’s municipalities have helped subnational governments to keep vital services going despite extraordinary pressure. And third, they have strengthened municipalities’ connections with — and ability to mobilise — their people in the resistance to the Russian occupier.
As for reconstruction, the process is already under way, and is a massive undertaking. By May 2023, more than 160,000 residential buildings had been destroyed. Two months earlier, the World Bank had put the total cost of reconstruction at nearly €400bn.
Local knowledge will be critical in guiding a successful reconstruction effort. Subnational governments should have a seat at the table in national planning bodies — for example through representation at the National Recovery Council. They should also be granted a leading role in designing and implementing reconstruction projects, backed by sufficient funds.
However, Ukraine will need to strengthen and rebuild subnational governments before they in turn can rebuild the country’s shattered towns and cities. The invasion has dealt a heavy blow to local capabilities: August data from the National Agency of Ukraine for Civil Service indicate that the war has already forced over 6,500 civil servants either to leave the country or join territorial defence forces. Skills will be in short supply at a time when they are needed most.
To address these gaps, there will need to be significant investment in the training of regional and municipal public servants in project appraisal, procurement, investment management and transparency. Building this expertise will be especially important in smaller towns and rural communities where more limited capacity risks undermining their ability to apply for and secure funds from the national government and international donors.
One way to address the capacity gap would be a “train-the-trainer” programme. This would support a skilled network of municipal trainers who can “upskill” local officials to deliver infrastructure projects. Local government in Ukraine also needs to develop systems to head off the risk of corruption.
These messages came through loud and clear when world leaders gathered in London in June for the Ukraine Recovery Conference. Participants stressed that the involvement of subnational governments in reconstruction decision-making would drive the recovery, as well as the country’s path towards EU and OECD membership.
Ukraine’s local institutions and leaders have brought its citizens more than just better services — they have in effect given them a second army as they seek to defend their freedom and their country. They hold the key to the postwar recovery too.