Rased Issues the Results of a National Study Titled: “Citizens’ Attitudes Toward Local Administration and Their Views on Municipal Performance”
Amman – 2026
Al-Hayat Center – Rased released the findings of a national study titled “Citizens’ Attitudes Toward Local Administration and Their Views on Municipal Performance” during a specialized dialogue session. Supported by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung (KAS) – Jordan Office, the study aimed to measure citizens’ perceptions of the performance of municipalities and Governorate Councils, assess the level of local services, and examine their views on different models of local administration, within the context of ongoing national discussions on reforming the Local Administration Law and redefining the roles of elected councils and executive administrations.
The study found that municipal affairs occupy a central place in citizens’ daily lives, with 82% of respondents reporting that municipal work affects their daily lives to varying degrees. Of these, 49% said it affects them significantly, while 23% said it affects them to some extent. This reflects the fact that municipalities are viewed not only as service providers, but also as a direct interface between citizens and the state at the local level.
Regarding the entity responsible for improving services in local areas, 61% of respondents considered the municipality the primary entity responsible for improving services in their area, while 31% viewed the responsibility as shared between the municipality, the Governorate Council, and the central government. Meanwhile, 4% identified the central government and 3% the Governorate Council as primarily responsible. This finding highlights the central role of municipalities in citizens’ perceptions as the primary authority responsible for quality of life and daily services.
Regarding the assessment of service levels over the previous six months, 51% of respondents rated services as good to excellent, with 19% describing them as excellent and 32% as good. In contrast, 49% rated services as average or poor, with 26% describing them as average and 23% as poor. Furthermore, 56% reported an improvement in service levels compared with the previous period, including 23% who described the improvement as significant and 33% as limited. Meanwhile, 32% said services had remained unchanged, and 12% believed they had deteriorated.
Complaints and Responsiveness
The study identified a clear challenge in the relationship between citizens and municipalities regarding complaints and responsiveness. 70% of respondents reported that they had either not submitted complaints to municipalities or had not heard of any complaints, while 30% had submitted or heard of complaints. The findings showed that 37% of complaints received no response, while 37% said that complaints were addressed quickly and 24% said they were addressed slowly.
The study also found that 49% of citizens were completely dissatisfied with existing complaint-handling mechanisms, compared with only 14% who were completely satisfied and 37% who were somewhat satisfied. Compared with the past, 41% said that complaint-handling mechanisms had not changed, while 16% believed they had become worse. In contrast, 43% said they had improved, ranging from somewhat better to much better.
Rased emphasized that complaints should be one of the key entry points for reforming local administration by developing a clear and traceable complaints system linked to publicly available performance indicators and an accountability framework that enables citizens to know the status of their complaints and the expected timeframe for receiving a response.
Municipal Field Performance and Service Quality
Regarding field performance and the quality of daily services, 63% of respondents reported observing a greater field presence of municipal staff, including 26% who described this presence as clear and 37% who described it as limited.
Similarly, 65% believed that general cleanliness had improved to varying degrees, with 23% describing the improvement as significant and 42% as moderate. Meanwhile, 26% said there had been no change, and 9% believed conditions had deteriorated.
In assessing the organization of municipal works, such as road excavation, maintenance, and licensing, 61% said that such activities were organized to very well organized (51% organized and 10% very well organized), while 39% considered them disorganized to chaotic (23% disorganized and 16% chaotic).
Regarding interactions with citizens within municipalities, 45% described the treatment they received as respectful and cooperative, while 24% described it as acceptable. In contrast, 10% rated it as weak or poor, while 21% said they did not know.
Performance of Appointed Municipal Committees
Regarding the current administration of municipalities through appointed committees, the study showed that 75% of citizens knew or had heard that municipalities are currently being managed by appointed committees. Of these, 54% said they were aware of this and 21% said they had heard about it.
When assessing the performance of these committees, 51% believed their performance was better to much better (34% better and 17% much better), while 37% said performance had remained at the same level and 12% believed it had worsened.
Furthermore, 47% reported that the speed of completing transactions had become faster or much faster (13% much faster and 34% faster), compared with 43% who said there had been no change and 10% who believed transactions had become slower.
Models of Local Administration and Leadership Selection
The findings revealed a clear public debate regarding the most appropriate model for managing municipalities. 46% of respondents preferred a fully appointed council, while 39% preferred a fully elected council, and 15% preferred a mixed model combining election and appointment.
Similarly, 52% of respondents supported the appointment of the mayor by the government, while 44% preferred the mayor to be directly elected by citizens, and 4% said they had no preference.
Respondents who preferred the direct election of mayors cited several reasons. 39% believed it would strengthen citizens’ direct representation, 40% said it would strengthen the mayor’s relationship with the local community, 11% believed it would enhance direct accountability to citizens, and 9% said it would help reduce the influence of personal interventions.
Among those who supported government appointment of mayors, 55% believed that appointment would reduce favoritism and personal interference, while 16% said it would strengthen administrative governance, 15% believed it would strengthen institutional accountability mechanisms, and 13% said it would contribute to separating decision-making from implementation.
Governance, Distribution of Powers, and Accountability
The findings showed clear support for defining and clarifying the powers of the elected council and executive administration. 61% of respondents supported this approach, while 39% did not.
Furthermore, 65% believed that municipal councils should have a greater planning and oversight role rather than an executive one. This included 32% who strongly agreed and 33% who somewhat agreed. Meanwhile, 24% did not support this view, while 12% said it made no difference.
Regarding the impact of separating decision-makers from those responsible for implementation, 65.2% believed that such separation would improve performance to varying degrees: 19% said it would improve performance significantly, while 46.2% said it would improve performance. In contrast, 17.3% saw no difference, and 17.4% believed it would weaken performance. Furthermore, 75.7% said that clearly defining powers and responsibilities would strengthen accountability.
As for the entity that should oversee municipal performance, 42% of respondents believed the government should perform this role, while 37% preferred an independent oversight body. Another 11.5% believed citizens should have an oversight role, while 9.5% selected the elected council.
These findings indicate that citizens support a multi-level accountability model that does not rely on a single entity, but rather combines governmental, institutional, and community-based oversight.
Models for Major Cities
Regarding models for major cities, the study found that 63% of respondents in Irbid Governorate strongly supported applying the Greater Amman Municipality model—under which the mayor is appointed and one-third of council members are appointed—while 17% supported the model, 16% opposed it, and 4% strongly opposed it.
In Zarqa Governorate, 65% of respondents strongly supported applying the Greater Amman Municipality model, while 22% supported it. Meanwhile, 11% opposed it and 1% strongly opposed it.
The reasons for this support included the perceived success of the Greater Amman Municipality experience at 26.24%, the need for more professional and stable administration at 23.67% faster decision-making and project implementation at 19.40%, the size of cities and complexity of services at 17.71%, and improved long-term planning at 12.97%.
Governorate Councils
Regarding Governorate Councils, 51% of respondents described the previous experience of Governorate Councils as weak to very weak (24% weak and 27% very weak), while 39% described it as acceptable and 10% considered it very successful.
Regarding the most appropriate model for forming Governorate Councils, 41% preferred full appointment, 24% preferred full election, 20% preferred a model combining election and appointment, and 15% said it made no difference to them.
As for the most appropriate future role of Governorate Councils, 72% believed their role should be advisory, planning, or oversight-oriented, while 28% said there was no need for them in their current form.
Overall Assessment of the Current Municipal Administration
In the overall assessment of the current direction of municipal administration under appointed committees, 69.3% of respondents said that the current administration of municipalities is moving in the right direction, including 19.7% who said it was doing so completely and 49.6% who said it was doing so to some extent.
In contrast, 30.7% said it was not moving in the right direction or not moving in the right direction at all, including 24% who said “no” and 6% who said “not at all.”
Furthermore, 69% supported the continuation of appointed committees for a transitional period, including 22% who strongly supported this and 47% who supported it, compared with 31% who opposed or strongly opposed it (26% opposed and 5% strongly opposed).
Al-Hayat Center – Rased emphasized that the study’s findings reveal a genuine opportunity to redesign the model of local administration in Jordan in a way that achieves a better balance between administrative efficiency and democratic representation, strengthens accountability and responsiveness mechanisms, and connects legislative reform with improvements in citizens’ everyday experience of local services.
The Center stressed that any forthcoming legislative amendments should take into account a number of priorities reflected in the study’s findings, foremost among them: improving the quality of municipal services; developing complaints and response mechanisms; strengthening the field presence of municipal staff; clarifying the relationship between elected councils and executive administrations; separating decision-making from implementation; establishing a multi-level accountability system; and redefining the role of Governorate Councils in a more effective manner linked to planning and oversight.
Rased also called for treating the study’s findings as a tool supporting legislative and policy discussions surrounding the Local Administration Law, particularly as the figures demonstrate that citizens do not hold one fixed position toward election or appointment. Rather, they assess different models based on their ability to improve services, reduce favoritism, accelerate the completion of transactions, strengthen accountability, and enable local communities to influence decisions that directly affect their daily lives.
The study was based on a national sample statistically representative of Jordanian society, designed according to established statistical principles and standards. It was conducted through direct, face-to-face field interviews with citizens across all governorates of the Kingdom.
A total of 2,145 questionnaires were collected. Following data auditing, verification, and statistical cleaning, 2,118 valid questionnaires were retained for analysis, with a 99% confidence level and an approximately ±3% margin of error, enhancing the reliability and generalizability of the findings.
The study covered multiple areas, including the assessment of municipal services, complaint-handling mechanisms, the field presence of municipal staff, the experience of appointed committees, models for selecting mayors and councils, participation in local elections, governance and the separation of powers, as well as the assessment of Governorate Councils and models for major cities.
