DEBRE MARKOS UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE AND HUMANITIES

DEPARTMENT OF CIVICS AND ETHICAL STUDIES

THE ROLE OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECENTRALIZATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF

DEMOCRACY: THE CASE OF ASELLA CITY ADMINISTRATION.

A PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF CIVIC AND ETHICAL STUDIES

IN DEBRE MARKOS UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENT FOR THE BACHELOR OF ART IN CIVICS AND ETHICAL STUDIES

BY: MELAKU ABU

ID NO: 079/11
ADVISOR: ADANE M.
JUNE 2013
DEBRE MARKOS ETHIOPIA
Table of content

Content Page

CHAPTER ONE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
INTRODUCTION-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
1.1. Background of study----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
1.2. Statement of problem---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
1.3. Objective of the study--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.3. 1. General objective of study-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.3.2. Specific of objective---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.4. Research question-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5
1.5. Significance of the study-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5
1.7. Scope of study-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5

Chapter Two---------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
RREVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE------------------------------------------7
2.1. The concept of decentralization--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
2.2. Relationship between decentralization and democracy-------------------------------------------------------9
2.3. Types of decentralization----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9
2.3.1. Administrative decentralization------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9
2.3.2. Fiscal decentralization----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
2.3.3. Political decentralization-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------10
2.4. Global experience (lesson) in decentralization------------------------------------------------------------------11
2.5. Decentralization in Ethiopia----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12
2.6. Strong and weak sides of decentralization-----------------------------------------------------------------------14

CHPTER THREE------------------------------------------------------------------------18
METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY-------------------------------------------------18
3.1. Description of the study area----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
3.1.1.Location----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
3.1.2.Population--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18
3.2.Research design---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
3.3.Source of data-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
3.3.1.Primary data----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18
3.3.2.Secondary data--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19
3.4.Data Collection Instruments-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19
3.5.Sampling Technique---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19
3.5.1.Sampling Size---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19
3.6.Methods of Data Analysis---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------20

Reference------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
Decentralization is the transfer of authority and responsibility for a function from the central
government to subordinate or independent government of organization or private sector is
militated concept (Taye Asefa, 2007).
Among different type of decentralization are administrative decentralization, fiscal
decentralization, market or economic decentralization and political decentralization.
Administrative decentralization seeks to redistribute authority, responsibility and financial
resource for providing public services among different levels of state. It also popular governance
arrangement aimed at achieving complete devolution of decision making power and transferring
political responsibility to sub national governments in Federal system. The independent and
autonomy of the constitutional units are so important that authorities and responsibilities are
constitutionally shared between central government and other subsidiary units of government
(Ibid).
Political decentralization aims to give citizens elected their leaders or making power in public
decision and also more influence in the formulation and implementation of police. Advocate of
political decentralization assume that decision made with greater participation will better
informed more relevant diverse interest in select than those made any by nation political
authorities (Bahiru, 2006).
In the last decade decentralization has gained acceptance as expressed goal or as an actual
pursuit in several Africa country. Historically African countries have personalized and highly
centralized governance system: In pre-colonial period immediately, the African countries
governance system was structured and practiced in highly centralized manner. But, starting in the
1980, most African countries started to transfer of power, resource and responsibility to their
sub- national government. However, the political decentralization in African still not developed
as much as possible.
Decentralization is recent phenomenon in Ethiopia political landscape. The first move towards
institutional decentralization in Ethiopia states in imperial era when Hailesselassie submitted to
Parliament, the draft proposed to grant administrative autonomy to awraja government. But the
program was implemented in selected places on an experiment basis. Each awraja economic
potential to become self-sufficient administrative area as a critical consideration in the selection
process.
However, the policy could be considered a typically administrative measure aimed at easing
bureaucratic controlled at center rather than a serious decentralization experiments to bring about
effective self-government. In addition, the policy did not have much positive impact on
decentralization in Ethiopia. It was unlikely that the policy has promoted genuine local self-
government (Chen, 1997).
The Dreg had no better record than its predecessors on decentralization in Ethiopian state. The
regime established a peasant and urban dweller associations. That was empowered to carry out
social, economic and judicial functions. These mass organization enjoyed significant autonomy
and served as popular institutions of governance. However latter these institutions were strip of
their autonomy because the regime converted them in to political instrument,(Andargatcew,
1993).
Following the dawn fall of the dreg, the transitional government of Ethiopia (TGE), established
in 1991. During this period, Ethiopia was divided in to12 self-governing regional states and 2
special autonomous administrative cities. But latter the number of regional states reduced in to 9
following the controversial merger of the number ethnic and nationality groups. Ethiopia was
declared a federal republic following the adoption of the 1995 constitution: However, current
regime has a number of short falls, resulting from in adequacy of resource (humane power and
finance) in experience lack of awareness, poor coordination and low level of institutionalization
etc. (Kasahun and Tegegne, 2004).
At the subnational level, there was a tendency towards administrative decentralization to develop
democracy system of government with in its organs. In regions, identity-based ethnic
decentralization was primarily installed in regional, zonal and even kebele levels merely
geographic entities created on the base of administrative decentralization to develop democracy.
With regarding to administrative decentralization, it is important to share power from top to
lower level of government organs to make their power balanced and develop democracy in the
country.
As the study concerns, Asella City Administration is one of the city administration found in Arsi
Zone in Oromia regional state of Ethiopia and bordered with south Bench, North Bench,
Guraferda, Suruma and Menit Goldia woreda in Bench Sheko Zone. With regard to the study the
researcher will be tried to addressed the problems in the administrative decentralization area in
her study like factors that challenges administrative decentralization, the measures taken by city
administration to ensure administrative decentralization and what role played by administrative
decentralization to develop democracy in the city.

1.2 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Today countries in the world are recommended by researcher, scholars and also different writers
to reorganize their government with a decentralization system of government. This is because of
the fact that its role of effective and efficient services delivery to their two tiers of government
(Tegene, 2004).
According to African organization, the developing countries in the world most powers coroneted
by European power and not lead their tradition. Political decentralization has advanced
considerably in Africa in the last two decades, since 1990, many African central governments
such as Botswana, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, South Africa,
Tanzania, and Uganda have initiated or deepened process to transfer of authority, responsibility,
and resources to sub national levels (USAID, 2010). Ethiopia is one of developing nations
administrated by dictatorial government for a long period of time.
Today, there is a formation of a good policies and laws. But, lack of policy implementation is a
problem for administrative decentralization and development of democracy. Though there are
few studies conducted on role of administrative decentralization for development of democracy
in different area. They largely focus on division of power between federal and regional
government. For instance, Girmay Haile (2003), and HaileSellasie Abay (2003), conducted on
the study the division of power in the federal and regional government.
Administrative decentralization encourages development of local government as principal way of
exercise democracy and enhancing tolerance of diversity, accountability and transparency.
Ethiopian administrative decentralization is some way it is a new phenomenon. Particularly in
Asella city administration have many problems regarding administrative decentralization such
as very complex bureaucracy process, lack of awareness about concept of administrative
decentralization, financial dependence of administration from zone administration, lack of
transparency, accountability and power concentration in the hand of officials.
The gap of this study focus on the local people empowerment and also it specifically how city
administration seems to like in the administrative decentralization. Assessing the above stated
gaps may come with some finings and fulfill those gaps not addressed by aforementioned
researchers and this makes this research unique from the other researcher.
1.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The study has both general and specific objective
1.3.1 GENERAL OBJECTIVE OF STUDY
The general objective of this study is to investigate the role of Administrative decentralization for
development of democracy: in the case of Asella City Admimistration.
1.3.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
 To assess the challenge of administrative decentralization to develop democracy in the
city administration.
 To assess role and prospects of administrative decentralization to develop democracy in
study area
 To analyze the measure taken by the city administration in political decentralization to
develop democracy or local people empowerment in the study area.

1.4. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

 What are the main challenges of Administrative decentralization in the Asella City
Administration?
 What are the role and prospects of administrative decentralization in the study area?
 What measures that taken by the administration to ensuring decentralization on
administration in study area?
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The major aim of the study will be to examine the role of Administrative decentralization for
development of democracy in the case of Asella City Administration. This study might help
serve as an important starting point for other researchers who have interested to conduct further
study on the subject and used to solve administrative decentralization problems in study area.

1.7. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

It is known that the all type of decentralization plays, a mandatory role for development of
democracy. However, investigation of the whole aspects of decentralization is very difficult due
to a number constraint. Therefore, this research has limited on the role of administrative
decentralization for development of democracy in case of Asella City.
The reason choosing this aspect of decentralization is to improve quality of decision making at
top level of management of government authority among each other, to make quicker and better
division of power in all level of government to exercise their power and in decentralized system.
Administrative decentralization shares and transfers power of government from higher level to
lower level to balance government authority for suitability of administrative system in the study
area.

CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATUR
2.1 THE CONCEPT OF DECENTRALIZATION
Decentralization covers a wide range of concepts, although it mostly refers to the transfer of
responsibilities, power and function from central government to sub national units of
governments. This definition stands only to denote decentralization in the public sector of
organization. The term, used or refers the transfer of authority and responsibility from central
government to subordinate or quasi-independent government and voluntary organization or the
private sector (Eshetu, 1994).
In the last quarter 20century many in the world have engaged in the decentralization by
transferring of responsibilities of the state to lower tier of government. Such transferring of
power is believed to bring not only political stability and Democratic governance but also to
improve service delivery and to attain equity. The significance of decentralization drive to local
and grass root level empowerment in the fact that different level of sub national units of
government is constituted on basis of citizen participation in the political process by way of
exercising electoral right. Local self - government encourage the rights and abilities of local
authority, which the limits of law, to regular and mange a sub national share of public affair
under their own responsibility and in interest of local population (ibid). Business
dictionary.Com/.Administrative development policy making agrees that decentralization is
necessary to the empowerment of local community to be response for their development.
Furthermore, decentralization is directly and indirectly link with aspect of good governance in
coding consensual decision making. Inquiry, representation accountability and responsiveness of
public institution to community concern (Taye, 2007). And to regionally and locally elected
leaders it provides opportunities for access to service. The right of ensuring the behavior and
action of the state institutions of function, participating in a decision making process with
regarding to their spheres, Resource and expenditure management, etc. Are complemented other
sets of policies such as poverty reduction, capacity building programmed and city administration
(Taye, 2006)
Throughout the world today there are movements towards decentralization. At the same time,
however, the meaning and the essence of decentralization is still subjected to debate. Despite the
existence of different theories about the concept of decentralization, it differs among scholars.
For instance, according to Research Triangle Institute (1997:2) to the public finance economist,
decentralization usually means fiscal decentralization. Reforming the intergovernmental fiscal
system is usually the first priority.
To the political scientist, decentralization usually means a set of policy issues, a focus on who
has authority and responsibility. The political scientist tends to focus on the structure of power
and authority and how it is wielded. To the institutional economist, decentralization usually
involves getting an incentive system in place so that individual behavior meets expectations.
To the sociologist, decentralization usually means participation, and the role of informal
organizations and community groups is a major focal point. The urban planner or economist may
stress yet another element— decentralization as a strategy for enhancing local economic
development. Finally, the civil society expert sees decentralization as a path to democratic local
governance
An attempt to review the literature on the concept of decentralization reveals the following.
According to (Mawhood 1983:18), decentralization is understood as sharing of part of
governmental power by a central ruling group with other groups, each having authority within a
specific area of the state. The fundamental areas in the decentralization are power, authority and
responsibility (ibid). Administrative decentralization also defined decentralization as the transfer
of legal and political authority from a central government and its affiliates to sub- national units
of government in the process of making decisions and managing public functions. It is a process
through which authority and responsibility for public functions is transferred from central
government to local government (Tegegne and Kassahun, 2004:36)

2.2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DECENTRALIZATION AND DEMOCRACY

The relationships among democratic decentralization, decentralization, and democratic local
governance are not a hierarchical relationship but rather a spectrum of relationships that help
define a framework for implementing democratic decentralization strategies (Research Triangle
Institute, 1997:7). The research institute identified the following relationships.
1. Central — Sub-national/Local (Decentralization)
The first major relationship is between the central government and the sub national or local
government. This reciprocal relationship is decentralization, the transfer of authority and
responsibility to local government. The authority and responsibility are administrative, financial,
and political. Local governments participate in central policymaking and influence activities at
the central level, as well as carrying out responsibilities formerly conducted by the central
government.
These major relationships of democratic decentralization are characterized by Instituting
Constitutional and Legal Reforms to Devolve Power to develop and enhance their relationship.
There is crucial role of the local self- governing in the enhancing democracy in federal system. It
brings government close to the people through both representative and participation democracy.
In addition to this, it is important for the development of democracy the promoting participation
of minority and disadvantaged group (Kinaidand Chattopadthay, 200

2.3. TYPES OF DECENTRALIZATIONS

Major form of decentralization includes the following. These are:-

2.3.1. Administrative Decentralization

Administrative decentralization is for redistributive authority, responsibility and it forms an
important aspect of political decentralization.
It refers to the transfer of powers and resources from higher levels of government to local
government situated in different territorial of regions with in the country depending on the on the
nature of the decentralization unit, administrative decentralization has two types, these are:-
DECENTRALIZATION
Decentralization is weakest form of administrative decentralization. As it distributes decision
making authority, financial and management responsibility, among the different levels of
government (Taye, 2007)
DELEGATION
Delegation is more extensive form of decentralization. Through delegation central government
transfer responsibility for decision and administration of public function to semi- autonomous
organization not wholly controlled by central government, but ultimately accountable to it.
Government delegate responsibility when they create public enterprises, housing authority’s
transportation authorities, special service districts, semi-autonomous school districts regional
development corporation, or special project implementation units (Tegegne, 2004)

2.3 2. Fiscal Decentralization

Fiscal decentralization is expansion of revenue and expenditure under the context of sub-
national government and administration unit. It is the establishment of effective and transparent
financial management at the core any efforts to perform the public sector to be genuinely
supportive of decentralization process. According to the Eshetu, the basic characteristics of a
system of decentralized financial management should be including: the public transparency of
allocation, predictability of the amount of available to local institution, and local autonomy of
decision making on resource (Eshetu Chile, 1994).

2.3.3. Political Decentralization

Political decentralization is transfer of political power and decision-making authority to sub
national level such as elected village council, district council and state level bodies. It is usually
referring to sharing, granting and established power to across outside its usual frame or
jurisdiction.
Political decentralization gives more power in decision making to citizens or their representatives
and can be described, as transfer of legitimacy (Olsen, 2007). This is the primary object of
political decentralization is to push decision making down to lower level of government and
empower communities to exercise self -rule at the local level.
2.4. Global Experiences (Lessons) In Decentralization
Decentralization is a counterpoint to globalization. Globalization often removes decisions from
the local and national stage to the global sphere of multi-national or non-national interests.
Decentralization on the other hand brings decision-making back to the sub-national and local
levels. In designing decentralization strategies it is necessary to view the interrelations of these
various dimensions – global, regional, national, sub-national, local. In this regard, the role of the
nation-state gains increased importance as a mediating force between the forces of globalization
and localization
Decentralization involves four dimensions – the collective/exterior, the collective/interior, the
individual/exterior and the individual/interior. The collective/exterior has to do with the
institutional and legal forms and procedures. The collective/interior deal with the societal culture,
set of values and assumptions which are often unspoken or unacknowledged but nevertheless
play a powerful role in human relationship.
The individual/exterior dimension has to do with the observable behavior of individuals within
the various societal institutions, whether government, private sector or civil society. The
dimension of the individual/interior deals with the mindset, world view, mental models, emotions
and intuitions of individuals within institutions. Effective decentralized governance planning
must be based on an analysis of these four dimensions in the global level. Due to this reason
decentralization plays important role in global experience from different perspectives such as
economic, social, political and cultural perspectives (UNDP, 1997).
Globally, the public sectors witnessed a significant expansion (albeit to varying extents) between
1945 to 1980s despite the plurality of economic structures and development stages. With
increased global integration, economic growth and varying levels of socio-political
modernization, the conventional role of the state in the socio-economic and political
management became more complex. In a way, the growth in the public sector was also motivated
by the conceived benchmarks of the nature of the society that the governments envisaged.
For example, post 1945 the commitment of the OECD countries (European countries in
particular) to welfare regimes and macroeconomic stability paved a way for the acceptance of the
state as a central institution for income redistribution, support to vulnerable groups and a
stimulant for aggregate demand (World Bank, 2008). The developing countries followed a
similar suit, many of them emerging after the decolonization and nationalist movements, in their
efforts to promote social cohesion and establishing growth trajectories.
The emergence of parastatals (especially in Africa) in the realm of poverty alleviation, health
service delivery and other public service delivery sectors, was also witnessed owing to the
absence of requisite incentives for private enterprise in the provision of these services and
engagement in the preferred sectors of the economy.
Decentralization is almost always the result of intentional decisions by policymakers. But there
is such a thing as inadvertent decentralization. This is not the same as decentralization by default
from other advertent decentralization. It occurs when other policy innovations produce an
unintended decentralization of power and resources as a by-product.
Two main examples of countries applied global experiences but they have occurred in large,
important countries. The first is Russia, where authorities at lower levels have acquired greater
powers than the central authorities intended as a result of oversights and unexpected
developments. The second is China, where provincial governments have obtained more resources
(arid power over them) than central leaders wished. There is other countries experienced
decentralization as globally are Germany Sweden Pakistan and Bolivia (Shahid Mahmood,
2016).

2.5. DECENTRALIZATION IN ETHIOPIA

As it is known, Ethiopia is a nation with more than 85 ethnic groups. In the span of the country,
Ethiopia has had three forms of social engineering. The first social Engineering was designed by
Emperor Minilik (1889-1913) but the significantly elaborated by Emperor Haile Selassie (1930-
36, 1941-74). Cultural and structural inequalities typified the imperial rule, with ethnic and
regional discontent rising until the revolution of 1974 overthrew the Monarch (Mulalem 2009:8).
Decentralization is not new phenomena in Ethiopian.
For instance, though the imperial government proposed the 1966 awraja self-administration
proclamation as a pilot project to make 50 Awraja self-administering units with considerable
autonomy, the first ever attempt to decentralize local and regional government in Ethiopia was
made in 1966 by the Haile Selassie government (Meheret 1998:8).
The second Ethnic social engineering (1974-91) according to (Mulualem 2009:8) was the
military government’s attempt to retain a unitary state and address the national question with in a
framework of Marxism Leninism. The military regimen created 24 administrative regions and 5
autonomous regions with in the unitary form of state bur no devolution of authority was
discernible. In the last decade of its rule, ethnic –based opposition organizations had intensified
their assault on the military government leading to regime’s demise in 1991. The Dreg’s plan to
decentralize the Ethiopian state was a response to political pressure intended to give some kind
of autonomy to groups fiercely opposed to central rule.
Accordingly the provinces of Tigray and Eritrea and Afar and Ogden areas, which were some of
Ethiopia’s unstable regions, were designated as autonomous areas with limited self-governing
authority (Meheret 1998:8).
The third ethnic social engineering (1991- present) is the efforts exerted by the Ethiopian
People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF) to maintain the Ethiopian state on the basis
of ethnic federalism as well as cultural, language and political autonomy at regional and sub-
regional levels (Mulalem2009:9).
The Transitional Government of Ethiopia which overthrew the Dreg in 1991 adopted a federal
form of state in 1992. The Ethiopian federal system assumed its present shape and form in 1995
following the adoption of the national constitution. The 1995 federal constitution recognized nine
Regional States. According to the constitution, these are the states of Tigray, Afar, Amhara,
Oromia, Somalia, Benshangul/Gumuze, Southern Nations Nationalities Peoples, Gambella and
the Harari People.
According to the Federal Constitution, each of the nine regional states has its own constitution,
flag, legislature, executives, judiciary and police. It chooses its own working language. The
constitution allows further decentralization from regional state to sub- regional state (ibid

2.6. Strong and Weak sides of Decentralization

According to (Bahru,2006) decentralization had multi: - fold strong sides first: decentralization
helps to improve the quality of decision making at the top-level management decentralization of
all authority among other executive at all level in organization relieves the top executive of
executive of exclusive burden saving his valuable time, which can devote to more important and
long-term problem.
Second: Decentralization makes decision: making quicker and better divisional heads are
motivated to make such decision s that will create the maximization profit because they are held
responsible for effect of their decision on profits
Third: Decentralization provides positive climate freedom to make decisions, freedom to use
engagement and freedom to act- it gives practical training to middle level managers and facilities
management at enterprise
Notwithstanding the many, and substantial strong sides and benefits of decentralization, this is
the model of governance does not come without some potential weaksides or risks, so that
appropriate safeguards or preventive. Measures can be taken or put in place.
Among such weak sides are the following:
1. Inter-regional inequalities may increase, and thus widen intra national poverty gap and foster
politically destabilizing forces. Since different regions and differently endowed in terms of
natural resources, level of economic activates, land values, etc. some local jurisdictions will
generate more revenue than other and afford their citizens more or better-quality services than is
provided in poorer jurisdiction. The heed for equitable distribution of available resources, to
avoiding such disparities, is frequently advanced to justify centralization.
That argument fails to recognize the significant incentives that are created, and development
benefits derived when the regions cannot be over looked. The challenges of decentralization
programs is therefore to devise arrangements with allow each region to undertake such initiatives
as they see fit, and to benefit from these, which putting in the place mechanisms to safeguard
against extreme disparities between the region. (King Victor 1980).
2. Decentralization can bring higher risks of resources/power capture by local elites or special
interest groups. Without adequate safeguards, there is a risk that powerful or well-placed local
elites may be able to capture resources/powers allocated or conferred on local authorities and use
these resources/powers for their own benefit/interest. Provisions are included to prevent the
process being high-jacked by any single group or small elite. (ibid)
3. A frequently advanced argument in support of centralization is that of economies of scale. The
burden of this argument is that central delivery of most services is usually more efficient,
particularly in the relatively small state, because of likely saving arising from reduced over
heads, bulk purchasing, and other areas of cost saving.
To extents that this is valid, it would represent limitation of decentralization. However, such
claims increased efficiency and cost saving are usually proven to more imaginary than real, as
factors such as elongated chains of command/supervision, remoteness from the scene of action,
inability to apply solutions which best fit the local situation, all lead higher cost which offset and
savings realized. Furthermore, the values of local involvement are cost that also carries a price.
On balance, it seems that decentralization is more likely to greater efficiency and is more cost-
effective. However, there are situations in which some degree of centralization will lead to
greater efficiency. There ideal approach may be to identify these aspects of any activity which
could benefits from centralization. (Ragoonath, Bishu, 1990)
4. Misuse of authority due to inadequate supervision/weak accountability mechanisms
constitutes a real risk of devaluation. This can happen if central government
supervision/accountability functions are removed due to the new autonomous status of local
government, but no alternative mechanisms for accountability in conferring greater autonomy on
local governments.
This is could include legislation to ensure transparency and openness in the conduct of local
affairs, and new mechanisms for accountability, such as the empowerment of civil society
entities to undertake watchdog functions. It should be noted however, that were devolution is
within the framework of participatory local governance, the risk of weak accountably is
minimized, because invariably the civil society partners will insist on and provided such
mechanisms. (ibid)
5. Decentralization represents a more complex form of governance. Creation of several level of
government brings complexities as to role and function, relationship, and revenue and power
sharing. The most controversial issue is usually related to finance of and relationship between the
different level of government or operation, is critical to successful exercise. (Miller, Keith, 2000)
There are related researches conducted by a few researchers on issue of decentralization, good
governance and democracy and fiscal decentralization. Among a few ZubairShahid (2016), study
on decentralization ,democracy and development, KajsaKarlstron ,(2015), study on
decentralization ,corruption and the role of democracy and the study conducted Negelegn
Bizuneh on assessment of the current status of decentralized governance and self-administration
in Ethiopia regional States and he examined that implementation of constitutional rights of
people in each regions.
According study conducted by (Mawhood 1983:18), decentralization is understood as sharing of
part of governmental power by a central ruling group with other groups, each having authority
within a specific area of the state
According to research conducted by Research Triangle Institute, (1997:2)
Democratic decentralization is the development of reciprocal relationships between central and
local governments and between local governments and citizens. It addresses the power to
develop and implement policy, the extension of democratic processes to lower levels of
government, and measures to ensure that democracy is sustainable. Democratic decentralization
incorporates both decentralization and democratic local governance.
The decentralization component of democratic decentralization, as it is explained above is the
transfer of authority and responsibility from central government to local government, whereas
democratic local governance is autonomous levels of local government, vested with authority
and resources that function in a democratic manner. That is, they are accountable and transparent,
and involve citizens and the institutions of civil society in the decision-making process. It
emphasizes the presence of mechanisms for fair political competition, transparency, and
accountability, government processes that are open to the public, responsible to the public, and
governed by the rule of law (Ibid). According to these researchers they come up with their
finding and solutions but still there are problems related to administrative decentralization in
woreda area.
Among Asella city Adminstration is concerned by this study and the researcher want to
investigate the role of administrative decentralization for the development of democracy, to
assess the challenges of administrative decentralization in study area and to analyze the measures
to taken by city administration in study area.
This might help serves as important point to enhance and develop the role of administration
decentralization practice with in study area research that have interested to conduct further study
on the subject for enhancing and encouraging the readers feeling.
The empirical result of research focused on the relationship between political decentralization
and fiscal decentralization Although most scholar use different definitions and measurements of
political decentralization, most studies find that politically decentralized countries have higher
corruption levels. Treisman (2000), on the other hand, find no statistically significant effect
between political (electoral and decision-making) decentralization and democracy.
Recognizing that it might not be the degree of political decentralization in isolation, but rather
how political decentralization interacts with the fiscal resources available to sub-national
governments, he interacts administrative and political decentralization but find no statistically
significant results on this either. Kyriacou and Roca-Sagalés (2011), on the other hand, find such
an interaction effect.
They report that fiscal decentralization alone lead to higher government quality, but not if it is
accompanied with administration decentralization
Generally the gaps identified by researchers show there is decentralization differences between
local and central governance including city admimistration.

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHOLOGY
3.1. DISCRPTION OF THE STUDY AREA
3.1.1. LOCATION
Asella City Administration is one of the city adminiatration located in the Oromia region of
Ethiopia part of Arsi Zone.The city administration is bordered on the east by Debub Bench,on
the northwest by She Bench and Sheko woreda, on the northeast by Kaffa and on the southeast
by Guraferda woreda. The adimnistrative center of city administration is Mizan Teferi, other
town including Aman.
3.1.2. POPULATION
 With regarding to demographical data based on the 2007 census conducted by the Central
Statistical Agency(CSA),the total population of Arsi Zone is 67,269 of whom 33,826 are men
and 33,443 are women with area of 19,252.00 square kilometres. Among the total population
density of zone 75,241 or 11.53% are Asella city inhabitants which found in city administration.

3.1. RESEARCH APPROACH

3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN

In order to collect accurate data from respondents the researcher would used qualitative
research design or method. In regarding qualitative one it is more appropriate to explore
the nature of the problem, issue or phenomena without qualify and description was
implementing. In regarding this method, it is more appropriate to determine and address
the extent the problem in the study area.

3.3. SOURCE OF DATA

3.2.1 PRIMARY DATA
The primary data will be gathered from key respondents through questionaire, interview and
personal observation of the researcher.

3.2.2 SECONDARY DATA

The secondary data will be gathered from books, journals published and unpublished
documents, internet , related research papers and directly from interviewee.
 3.4. DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS
During data collection the researcher Will be used the data gathering instrument such
asiquestionaire, interview and personal observation.
Interview: is a data collection technique that involves oral questioning of respondents either
individual or group. This discussion usually one-to-one an interviewee and researcher concerning
issues in study area.
Personal Observation: the researcher observes by personal the problems in the study area to
conduct her study.
3.5. SAMPLING TECHENIQUE
In the collection of data the researcher will use non probability sampling technique. Under this
non probability sampling the researcher will use purposive sampling method by selecting the
peoples those are participated in administrative decentralization affairs in the study area and the
researcher imagine that they have enough knowledge and experiences about this decentralization
and provide accurate information regarding on the issue. The researcher selected the participants
of this study without considering their backgrounds like religious, language, their historical
origins, and ethnicity, colors and other cultural life.

3.5.1. SAMPLING SIZE

The researcher will be used or selected five people from three offices such as administration
staffs, city administrative council office and civil servant offices because of their responsibility
and those to have knowledge about the essence of administrative decentralization. The reason
why the researcher use five peoples for sampling size is based on the assumption that it is better
to selected people who have detailed knowledge and information about the issue in the study
area.

3.6. METHOD OF DATA ANALSIS

The researcher will use qualitative research method of data analysis. The qualitative method is
used to describe the primary data gathered by one to one interview with key informants
concerning the study. Because this data analysis method simple and accurate to collect relevant
data from concerned body and easily to receive reliable information to conduct the study.
 Therefore, the researcher would expected to use this method to achieve her finding in the study
by analyzing data through qualitative method.

References
Bahiru Zewudie (2004); Brief over view of decentralization in Ethiopia forum of social Studies

Eshetu Chole .1994. Issues of vertical imbalance in Ethiopia’s emerging system of Fiscal

Decentralization. Ethiopian journal of Economics

Federal democratic Republic of Ethiopia (FDRE). 1995. The Constitution of the Federal

Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa; FDRE

Http/www.Business dictionary. Com local government

King, Víctor(ed) 1980.

KajsaKarlstron, 2016 Decentralization, Corruption and the role of Democracy

Mawhood, Philip. 1983. Decentralization: The Concept and the Practice, in Mawhood.P (Ed). Local
Government in the Third World the Experience of Tropical Africa John Wiley and Sons, New
York

Meheret Ayenew, 2007. Rapid Assessment of Woreda Decentralization

Miller, Keith 2000. Decentralization Local Governance and Community Participation.

Mulalem Denbegna (2009) Strong Unity through Diversity. The Ethiopian Herald.Vol. Lxvi No. 076 Tuesday 8
Decembers 2009

Negalegn Mamo(2001) the assessment of the current status of decentralization, good governance and self-
determination in Ethiopia

TayeAssefa (2007), decentralization in Ethiopia, printed in Addis Ababa University.

Addis Ababa Ethiopia

Taye (2006), background paper on decentralization

TsegayeTegeun (2006), Evaluation of the Operation and Performance of Ethnic

Decentralization in Ethiopia, 2nd edition of Addis Ababa University Press

Tegegne Gebre- Egziabher and Kassahun Berhanu 2004), The Role of decentralized

Governance in building local institution, diffusing ethnic conflicts and alleviating poverty in Ethiopian
Regional Development Dialogue

Research Triangle Institute (1997) Democratic Decentralization .A paper prepared for the United State Agency
for International Development

UN-HABITAT 2002 Local democracy and decentralization in East and Southern Africa publication of Global
Campaign on Urban Governance UNESCAP What is Good governance Available at
http://www.wnescap.org/pdd/prs/project Activate/Ongoing/gg/governance accessed on 12/01/2000

USAID (2010), Comparative Assessment Decentralization in Africa; Final Report

Standing Summary Finding

UNDP (1997) The Global Research Framework Of The Decentralized Governance Programme