Transcript Decentralisation - Trinity College, Dublin

Decentralisation
and
accountable participatory
governance
Ciara Aucoin, Colm Moloney and
Wahidullah Stanikzai
Masters in Development Practice
Decentralisation
• Centralised state
• Developing states reform 1980s- pressure from IMF,
UN, WB and donor countries
• Motivations for decentralisation:
 Policies and programmes can be tailored to better reflect local
needs
 The transparency and accountability of public affairs can be
increased
 Democracy can broadened through increased participation by the
population
But the motivations can be far from ideal …
Types of Decentralisation
Approach to
decentralisation
Institutional
Legal
Framework
Key Actors
Opportunities for
citizen
engagement
Example
Country
Deconcentrati
on
Transfer of
the personnel
from national
level to local
admin. offices
Government
and locally
placed technical
advisors
Relatively poor.
Where central
bureaucrats are
relocated little
space is created
for increased
public
participation
Cambodia
Delegation
Limited
transfer of
decisionmaking over
funding and
policy to local
government,
acting as
agents to the
central
government
Local semiautonomous
representatives
and agencies,
eg. public
forestry
administrations
Dependent on
whether the
agents at the
local level are
publicly elected,
or whether they
are relocated
from central
government
Senegal
Devolution
Transfer of
resources,
responsibility
and decisionmaking to the
local political
level
Locally elected
councillors,
mayors and
representatives,
outside of direct
control of central
government
Most access
created for pubic
where
autonomous
representatives
engaged
in decisionmaking work
closely with local
communities
Uganda,
Malawi
Devolution
Types of Devolution
Formal Arrangements
Key Actors
Administrative
where the implementation of
centrally-determined policy and
programmes are put into the
hands of the local agents
admin staff whose terms of
employment are defined by
local government
Constitutional
where local authorities have a
say in national policy-making
local authorities and/or
elected representatives
Fiscal
where sub-national tiers either
have the autonomy to implement
taxes for revenue and/or where
they control a significant
proportion of total government
spending
Local authorities and/or
elected representatives with
the oversight of central
government
The Risks of Decentralisation
• Decentralisation can enable clientelistic patterns of statesociety relations
• Decentralisation can create opportunities for state capture
• Decentralisation can exacerbate disparities
• Decentralisation and Conflict: mixed perspectives
Shaping the outcomes of Decentralisation
The importance of Context
Motivations
Power
Relations
Capacity
National Leaders
National Institutional
Arrangements
Local Gov.
Interests
Local Gov.
Power
Relations
Civil Society
Interests
Local
Government
Accountability
Local Gov.
Capacity
Space for
Public
Participation
Civil Society
Power
Relations
Civil Society
Capacity
Local StateSociety relations
Outcomes
Shaping the outcomes of Decentralisation
National Institutional Arrangements: The legal framework
Motivations
Power
Relations
Capacity
National Leaders
National Institutional
Arrangements
• Define the responsibilities being transferred (e.g. fiscal,
political, administrative)
• Define the legal status of sub-national governments (e.g.
degree of autonomy, accountability channels,
requirements for elections, requirements for public
participation
Shaping the outcomes of Decentralisation
Local State-Society Arrangements
Civil Society
Interests
Local Gov.
Interests
Local Gov.
Power
Relations
Local
Government
Accountability
Local Gov.
Capacity
Space for
Public
Participation
Civil Society
Power
Relations
Civil Society
Capacity
Local StateSociety
Arrangements
Outcomes
• Determined by interactions between Local Government
and Civil Society
• Influence decentralisation outcomes at the local level
Decentralisation in Practice
How far the observed outcomes diverge?
•
•
•
Does it increase public participation
Does it increase accountability
Does it reduce disparities
What can be learned?
Does it increase accountability?
•
Yes for...South Africa, IDP forums
•
Not in.....Indonesia, Susceptible to clientelism & capture
•
On balance... In Malawi, CCJP and MENJ
• Constituency Development Funds (CDFs)
Does it reduce disparity?
•
Poverty, not very positive in Uganda
•
Gender, very positive in Cambodia, Uganda, Rwanda, ---- but
not in the case of South Africa
•
Ethnic, yes for Nigeria, not really in Indonesia
Conclusion: What can we learn?
• It is not one size fit all approach
• NGO’s and Civil Societies can play a significant role
• Effective decentralisation requires effective state
Conclusion: What can we learn?
• It is not one size fit all approach
•NGO’s and Civil Societies can play a significant role
• Effective decentralisation requires effective state
Thank you for your attention, questions welcome
References
•
Antlov, Brinkerhoff and Rapp (2008) ‘Civil Society Organizations and Democratic Reform: Progress, Capacities, and Challenges in
Indonesia’ RTI International’ Paper presented at: 37th Annual Conference Association for Research on Nonprofit Organizations and
Voluntary Action, Philadelphia PA November 20-22, 2008
•
Cammack, Diana, Golooba-Mutebi, Fred, Kanyongolo, Fidelis and O’Neil, Tam (2007) ‘Neopatrimonial Politics, Decentralisation and
Local Government: Uganda and Malawi in 2006’ Good Governance, Aid Modalities and Poverty Reduction: Linkages to the Millennium
Development Goals and Implications for Irish Aid, Research project (RP-05-GG) of the Advisory Board for Irish Aid
http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/4746.pdf
•
•
Chhoeun, Sok and Byrne (2008) ‘Citadel of Women’: strengthening female leadership in rural Cambodia’ in Gender & Development Vol.
16, No. 3, November 2008, Oxfam GB 2008
•
Duncan, Christopher R. (2007) ‘Mixed Outcomes: The Impact of Regional Autonomy and Decentralization on Indigenous Ethnic Minorities
in Indonesia’ in Development and Change 38(4): 711–733 (2007). Institute of Social Studies 2007 Blackwell Publishing, UK
•
Eckardt, Sebastian (2007) ‘Political Accountability, Fiscal Conditions and Local Governance Performance- Cross- Sectional Evidence
from Indonesia’ Institute of Local Public Finance Working Paper 02-2007
•
Fritzen, Scott A. and Lim, Patrick W. O. (2006) ‘Problems and Prospects of Decentralization in Developing Countries’ LKY School of
Public Policy, National University of Singapore
•
Hadiz Vedi R. (2004) Decentralization and Democracy in Indonesia: A Critique of Neo-Institutionalist Perspectives in Development and
Change 35(4): 697–718 (2004). # Institute of Social Studies 2004. Blackwell Publishing UK
•
Kauzya, John- Mary (2007) ‘Political Decentralization In Africa: Experiences of Uganda, Rwanda and South Africa’ Department of
Economic and Social Affairs
United Nations
•
•
•
•
Kiyaga-Nsubuga, John (2001) ‘Strengthening Democracy at the Local Level: A Survey of Some Critical Issues’, for the United Nations
Public Administration Network (UNPAN).
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN010201.pdf
Selee, Tulehin and Oxhorn (2004) ed. ‘Decentralisation, Democratic Governance, and Civil Society in Comparative Perspective: Africa,
Asia
and
Latin
America’
Woodrow
Wilson
Centre
Press,
Washington
D.C.
References (Cont.)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Internal publications:
‘Decentralisation Key Sheet’- Pro-poor Infrastructure Provision, Overseas Development Institute, on behald of DFID, UK. April
2002 found at:
http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/2327.pdf
The Politics of Poverty: Elites, Citizens and States, A Synthesis Paper: Findings from ten years of DFID-funded research on
Governance and Fragile States 2001–2010
http://www.research4development.info/politicsofpoverty.asp
•
CRISE Policy Briefing no. 3 ‘Federalism, Decentralisation and Horizontal Inequalities’ - University of Oxford, Centre for Research
on Inequality, Human Security and Ethnicity (CRISE).
http://www.research4development.info/PDF/Outputs/Inequality/policybriefing3.pdf
•
‘Building for the Future, Speaking Out, Promgramme Insights, Oxfam GB, Nov. 2008
•
World Bank 2000: http://www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/decentralization/political.htm
•