ZAMBIAN OPEN UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

AN INVESTIGATION INTO COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION TOWARDS

CONSTITUENCY DEVELOPMENT FUNDED PROJECTS (CDF) IN KABWATA
CONSTITUENCY, LUSAKA PROVINCE, 2021.

BY

CYNTHIA NGOMA

COMPUTER NUMBER: 21732393

A RESEARCH REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE ZAMBIAN OPEN UNIVERSITY IN

PARTIAL FUFILMENT OF THE AWARDS OF BARCHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE IN
DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

1
 DECLARATION

We, hereby declare that the information I submitted for the Bachelor of Development Studies at
the Zambia Open University is my original work and has not previously been submitted to any
other institution of higher learning. I therefore declare that all sources cited or quoted are
indicated and acknowledged by means of comprehensive list of references. Therefore, it should
never be published whatsoever without prior consent from the author.

2
 DEDICATION

To my family and friends who encouraged me to work hard and persevere when I was almost
giving up, my two beautiful daughters who inspire me to be a better person, mother and mentor,
and to my parents who always taught me to believe and trust in myself, and to embrace education
because education is the best equalizer. It is because of all your support and love that am almost
at the finish line. Thank you

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank all the people and organisationsorganizations who rendered their support to
me during the preparation of this dissertation. I am indebted to my supervisor for her inspiration
and guidance. My gratitude also goes to all members of the Department of Development Studies
at the Zambian Open University for their intellectual guidance. I am also grateful to Kabwata
constituency key informants and all households which participated in this study. My thanks are
due to the Lusaka City Council for the information provided. Without their support, it would not
have been possible to conduct this research.

4
 ABSTRACT

The study examined the nature and level of community participation in Constituency
Development Funded projects (CDF) in Kabwata Constituency of Lusaka City. In 1995, the
Constituency Development Fund (CDF) was initiated in Zambia. The purpose of CDF is to
provide local authorities with discretionary funds whose utilisation is solely for the provision of
social services. CDF utilisation was expected to occur within a socially inclusive participatory
framework. Since 1995, all the districts in Zambia have been eligible to receive the funds
(Ministry of Local Government and Housing, 2006).

The general objective of the study was to investigate the nature and level of community
participation in Constituency Development Funded projects (CDF) in Kabwata Constituency.
The specific objectives of the study were; to find out the nature of community participation in the
identification, implementation and monitoring of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency; to
establish the level of community participation in the identification, implementation and
monitoring of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency; to establish factors accounting for the
level of community participation in CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency.

The study found that community participation takes on different forms at different stages of the
CDF project processes. The nature of community participation for the majority of local
communities in CDF projects is generally limited to consultation and use of unskilled labour.
Local communities are generally not actively involved in project identification, implementation
and monitoring processes. The study found that the factors accounting for the level of
community participation in CDF projects included lack of awareness and knowledge of CDF,
lack of awareness about the right and opportunities for participation, inadequate information
dissemination, poverty and poor community attitudes towards participation.

The study recommends that local communities should be sufficiently sensitised to play an active
role in the CDF process, in this regard, sub-district structures such as WDCs, ADCs, and RDCs
will need to take up the responsibility of sensitizing local communities to enable them make
informed decisions.

5
Table of Contents

CHAPTER ONE:.............................................................................................................................................8
1.0. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................11
1.1. Background of Study.......................................................................................................................11
1.2. Statement of the Problem..............................................................................................................12
1.3. General Objective...........................................................................................................................13
1.3.1.Specific Objectives....................................................................................................................13
1.4. Research Questions........................................................................................................................13
1.5 Rationale of the Study.....................................................................................................................14
1.6 Limitations of the Study...................................................................................................................14
CHAPTER TWO:..........................................................................................................................................15
2.0. LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................................................................................15
2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................15
2.2. Theoretical Framework...................................................................................................................15
2.2.1. Agency Theory.........................................................................................................................15
2.2.2. Motivation Theory...................................................................................................................15
2.3. Conceptual Framework...................................................................................................................16
2.3.1. Operationalization...................................................................................................................16
2.3.2. Project Identification...............................................................................................................16
2.3.3. Community Participation and Empowerment.........................................................................17
2.3.4. Empowerment.........................................................................................................................17
2.3.5. Monitoring and Evaluation......................................................................................................17
2.3.6. Completion and Non-completion of Constituency Development Funds Project.....................18
2.4. Theoretical Review of Literature.....................................................................................................18
2.4.1. Local Perspectives....................................................................................................................18
2.4.2. Global Perspectives..................................................................................................................24
CHAPTER THREE:.......................................................................................................................................27
3.0. PROPOSED METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................27
3.1. Study Design...................................................................................................................................27

6
 3.2. Study Site........................................................................................................................................27
3.3. Target Population...........................................................................................................................27
3.4. Sampling Technique........................................................................................................................27
3.6. Inclusion Criteria.............................................................................................................................28
3.6.2. Exclusion Criteria.....................................................................................................................28
3.7 Data collection methods and tools..................................................................................................28
3.7.1 Primary Data.............................................................................................................................28
3.7.2. Secondary Data........................................................................................................................31
3.8. Data Analysis..................................................................................................................................32
CHAPTER FOUR..........................................................................................................................................33
PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS....................................................................................................................33
4.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................33
4.2 Participation in CDF project identification.......................................................................................33
4.3 Participation in CDF project implementation...................................................................................35
4.4 Participation in monitoring of CDF projects.....................................................................................38
4.6 Factors Affecting Community Participation in CDF in Kabwata Constituency..................................40
4.6.1 Poor community awareness of CDF..........................................................................................40
4.6.2 Poor community knowledge about CDF...................................................................................41
4.6.3 Lack of community awareness of opportunities to participate in CDF projects........................42
4.6.4 Lack of awareness of structures through which local people participate in Constituency
Development Funds Projects in Kabwata Constituency.....................................................................44
4.6.5 Limited Information and information dissemination................................................................45
4.8 Social economic reasons..................................................................................................................46
4.9 Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................46
CHAPTER FIVE............................................................................................................................................48
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................48
5.1 Summary of conclusions..................................................................................................................48
5.2 Recommendations...........................................................................................................................50
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................................51
APPENDICES..............................................................................................................................................53
Appendix I: Proposed Work plan...........................................................................................................53
Appendix II: Proposed Budget..............................................................................................................53

7
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Reponses showing awareness of CDF Projects…………………………………..40

8
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 responses of community members who have ever attended meetings to identify
projects to be funded using
CDF……………………………………………………………….34

Figure 3.2 Responses showing respondents who have ever participated in implementation
of CDF
projects…………………………………………………………………………………….35

Figure 4.1 Sex of Respondents………………………………………………………….………

35

Fig….4.2
Age…………………………………………………………………………………….35

Figure 4.3 Respondents Highest Level of

Education………………………………………….35

Figure 4.43 Responses of respondents who have contributed labour to CDF projects………
36

Figure 4.54 Responses showing Community involvement in the contribution of materials

for CDF
projects…………………………………………………………………………………….38

Figure 4.65 Responses of respondents who have participated in monitoring of

CDF……….38

9
Figure 4.76 responses showing community knowledge about
CDF…………………………..41

Figure 4.87 responses showing awareness of opportunities to participate in CDF projects…

43

Figure 4.98 Are you aware of structures that you can use to participate in CDF
projects....44

Figure 4.109 Respondents views on availability of

informant………………………………….45

ACRONYMNS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS/ACRONYMS

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

CBD Central Business District

CDCC Constituency Development Coordinating Committee

CDF Constituency Development Fund

CSO Central Statistical Office

10
DDCC District Development Coordinating Committee

DSA District Situational Analysis

EAZ Economics Association of Zambia

EFZ Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia

GRZ Government of the Republic of Zambia

MOF Ministry of Finance

MoLGH Ministry of Local Government and Housing

MP Member of Parliament

NGOs Non-Governmental Organisations

PDCC Provincial Development Coordinating Committee

SAG Sector Advisory Group

WDC Ward Development Committee

ZGF Zambia Governance Foundation

CHAPTER ONE:

1.0. INTRODUCTION

Zambia’s National Assembly in 1995, made a historic decision to make mandatory the allocation
of funds to respective constituencies represented by members of parliament as a model of
ensuring decentralized development from the lowest unit of society (GRZ 2006b:1). This
annualized funding came to be termed as Constituency Development Fund (CDF) created
through an act of parliament in1995 (GRZ 2006b: 1). The rationale behind this initiative was to

11
provide members of parliament and their constituent communities with the opportunity to make
choices and implement projects that maximize their welfare especially in the areas of health and
education. This fund was established mainly to assist fight poverty through the implementation
of development projects at the local level and particularly those that provide basic needs such as
healthcare, education, water, agricultural services, security and electricity (GRZ 2006: 2), among
others.

1.1. Background of Study

When Zambia attained independence in 1964, it undertook what may be construed as
decentralisation programmes, all aimed at bringing about development. The decentralisation
efforts have included a mixture of the major types of decentralisation, namely de-concentration,
delegation and devolution.” According to Dresang (1975), at independence Zambia inherited a
disjointed administrative structure comprising a “diffuse collection of government departments
enjoying a large measure of autonomy and only loosely controlled by any central, coordinating
body, whether bureaucratic or political.” The government was faced with the challenge of
transforming the inherited structure “into a dynamic local governance framework that could
facilitate sustainable public participation” (Chikulo 2009). The re-introduction of multiparty
politics in 1991 in Zambia facilitated the establishment of more support for citizen participatory
approaches to developmental Processes. This necessitated the concept of community
participation which has been endorsed by both the Central Government and by Local Authorities
in Zambia as an essential strategic element in projects designed to improve living conditions for
the local community especially the low-income Groups.
The CDF in Zambia was approved by Parliament in 1995 for the implementation of community
based projects which would in the long term improve the socio-economic wellbeing of the
constituents (GRZ 2006). It was introduced within Zambia’s wider decentralisation drive as a
public fund to target development projects at the grassroots level. It is situated within the local
government framework and was set up by the government to mitigate poverty and to harmonise
the spread of development throughout the country, with the aim of ensuring that a portion of the
annual government revenue is earmarked for constituencies to finance development projects on a
priority basis arrived at by members of a constituency.
CDF by design is intended to decentralise resource allocation by channeling resources directly to
community level so as to enable the participation of the local community in development

12
projects. It represents the tenets that are central to community development in which the
members of the community as stakeholders are allowed the opportunity to participate and
determine their development priorities and allocate availed resources accordingly. It is viewed by
its proponents as a solution to the provision of decentralized
Against this background, this concept paper was purposed to investigate the extent to which the
CDF sent to these constituencies meet the stated objectives for which the CDF was established
and investigate the levels of community participation in the choice of projects to be undertaken
using these funds in Kabwata constituency of Lusaka province. The study will approach the
issues from a non-partisan approach and will cover the period from CDF introduction to date.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

In 1995, the Government of Zambia introduced CDF as a tool to initiate projects in different
sectors aimed at reducing poverty levels as well as improving urban lives (MoLGH; 2006). This
endeavour of improving efficiency and utilization in service delivery was to be carried out in
partnership with ordinary members of the community, faith based organizations and Non-
Governmental Organisations amongst many others which are supporting service delivery in the
constituency with over 65,000 human population. The Zambian government introduced
Constituency Development Funds (CDF) through which the constituents can come up with
projects to reduce the levels of poverty and improve the quality of their lives (MoLGH, 2006).
The funds are meant to provide goods and services directly to constituents through additional
funds for local community development, outside line ministries.

The constituency development fund (CDF) is guided by CDF guidelines. These guidelines
provide for community participation in the identification, implementation and monitoring of
CDF-funded projects. These funds are required to meet the immediate social needs of local
communities by allowing them to participate in the process by identifying, implementing and
monitoring the infrastructural projects to be implemented in their own communities. However,
concerns have been raised about community participation in identification, implementation and
monitoring of projects funded under Constituency Development Fund (CDF). The question
therefore is to what extent do communities participate in CDF projects in Kabwata
Constituency? The study therefore aims to investigate the impact of CDF on service delivery in

13
 stimulating development in kabwata constituency and determine the levels of community
involvement in the setting of priority areas for application of these funds.

1.3. General Objective

An investigation into community participation towards constituency development funded
projects (CDF) in Kabwata constituency, Lusaka province 2020.
1.3.1. Specific Objectives
 To establish who is in charge of CDF in Kabwata Constituency, Lusaka province
 the nature of community participation in the identification, implementation and
monitoring of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency.
 To establish the level of community participation in the identification, implementation
and monitoring of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency.
 To establish factors accounting for the level of community participation in CDF projects
in Kabwata Constituency.To determine at what stage the community gets involved in
CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency, Lusaka Province
 To identify some of the community driven CDF projects undertaken in Kabwata constituency.
 To explore opportunities for change


1.4. Research Questions

Specifically, the study seeks to answer the following questions:

 Do community members participate in the identification, implementation and monitoring

of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency?
 What level do community members participate in the identification, implementation and
monitoring of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency?
 Which factors account for the level of community participation in CDF projects in
Kabwata Constituency?
 Who are the main authorities in charge of coordination and supervision of CDF projects
in Kabwata Constituency, Lusaka province?
 At which stage do ordinary community members gets involved in CDF projects in
Kabwata Constituency, Lusaka Province?

14
  What are some of the community driven CDF projects undertaken in Kabwata
constituency?
 What recommendations would you suggest for CDF project implementation?

1.5 Rationale of the Study

The Government of the Republic of Zambia invests huge sums of money in constituency
development projects across the country every year. These projects are aimed at improving the
living standards of people in their respective constituencies. However, the success of these
projects lies in the participation of the recipients (the local people) of these projects as that will
create a sense of ownership in them and ensure that after completion, the projects are guarded
jealously and put to good use.
Therefore, it is important to investigate into community participation towards constituency
development funded projects (CDF) as the findings of this research will policy makers in
Government and the Ministry of Community Development to find better ways of implementing
and stimulating community participation in CDF projects.
The study findings will also help in filling the existing gap in the body of knowledge about what
others have written on the subject thereby contributing to the existing body of knowledge.
Further, the study will also provide a practical learning experience for the researcher.

1.6 Limitations of the Study

 The researcher may face limitations as regards time to collect all relevant data and
information.
 The researcher may incur costs which may hinder the full execution of the study
 Positive response may not be readily availed to the researcher by the community
 Anticipated bias of responses due to political affiliations of respondents
 High levels of unresponsive respondents due to skepticism/political nature of study and
the pending General Elections

15
 CHAPTER TWO:

2.0. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
The chapter discusses the theoretical framework and the conceptual framework. The conceptual
framework discusses the relationship between the independent and the dependent variables. It
also discusses the operationalization of the variables.

2.2. Theoretical Framework

This section discusses the two theories that underpin the variables that affect the utilization of the
Constituency Development Fund projects (CDF). The theories are Agency theory, Motivation
and Theory of Effective Project Implementation. These theories will help in understanding
varying costs of additional external finance.
2.2.1. Agency Theory
The theory explains the relationship between the principal and the agent. The theory deals with
two problems. The principal and the agent are in conflict and the two differ in their tolerance to
risk. The major challenge in this theory is to get agents to either set aside self-interest, or work in
a way in which they may maximize their personal wealth while still maximizing the wealth of
the principal (Eisenhardt, 2009).
The principal variable represents the communities/beneficiaries while the agent represents the
CDF management committees. The agent or CDF management committee’s major objective for
project implementation is to maximize personal wealth and this sometimes leads to little or no
trickledown effects to the beneficiaries or the community (principal),hence, there is constant
conflict between the two to ensure a balance between wealth accumulation of respective CDF
authorities and project outputs in the target communities. This is also illustrated by the
trickledown effect of project benefits in the target community and also successfully completed
community projects.

16
2.2.2. Motivation Theory
The Theory according to McClelland (2011), an individual’s motivation can result from three
dominant needs namely, the need for achievement, the need for affiliation and the need for
power on the need for achievement. The CDF committee can perform its duties by management
constituency development fund project when provided with right financial management tools
such as, planning, programming and budgeting systems.
McClelland (2011) argues that individuals who are high in need for achievement are more likely
than those who are in low in it to engage in activities or tasks that have a high degree of 44
individual responsibilities for outcomes, require individual skill and effort, have a moderate
degree of risk, and include clear feedback of performance.
Implementation as Nutt (2006) puts it is a series of steps taken by responsible organizational
agents to plan change process to elicit compliance needed to install changes. Managers use
implementation to make planned changes in organizations by creating environments in which
changes can survive and be rooted (Nutt, 2006). Implementation is a procedure directed by a
manager to install planned changes in an organization.

2.3. Conceptual Framework

A conceptual framework is a product of qualitative process of theorization which interlinks
concept that together provides a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon or phenomena
(Jabareen, 2009). The concepts that constitute a conceptual framework support one another,
articulate their respective phenomena, and establish a framework-specific philosophy that
defines relationships. The conceptual framework of this study relates to independent variables;
Project Identification, Allocation of Funds, Political involvement, Monitoring and Evaluation,
and the dependent variable; completion of CDF projects in Kabwata Central constituency of
Lusaka City.

17
Figure : Conceptual Framework
2.3.1. Operationalization
This is the translation of concepts into tangible indicators of their existence. The
operationalization of concepts ensures clarity of definition. This section defines the concepts of
the study.
2.3.2. Project Identification
This is the first of an initiative in which the setting and clarifying of the initiative objectives is
done. It is at this stage where the need analysis and baseline surveys are undertaken to ascertain
the problems, needs and interests of possible stakeholders. Therefore, project identification
requires that all the stakeholders affected by the project are involved at this stage. This allows
sharing of the vision through need assessment, followed by group discussion analysis. According
to Kerote (2007), this will not only confirm the need for change, but also clarify the scope of the
problem at hand and the resource-based available. The research measured project identification
and stakeholders’ involvement using the number of meetings and plans.
2.3.3. Community Participation and Empowerment
From the literature review on the CDF, it has been observed that stakeholders’ involvement plays
a major role in influencing the completion of the projects being implemented. This is asserted to
by Ongoya and Lumallas (2005). The Political involvement was measured using the influence
politicians have on decisions to select the projects.
2.3.4. Empowerment
Empowerment is defined as “an attitudinal, structural, and cultural process whereby young
people gain the ability, authority and agency to make decision and implement change in their
own lives and the lives others” (Ministry of Youth and Sport , 2015). According to Abdalla

18
Gergis (1999), empowerment is seen as a response to the failure of modernization and ‘trickle
down” economics of the 1970s and the 1980s, and the widespread perception of the State’s
inability to intervene successfully on behalf of the poor or other disempowered groups in the
society. For Jo Rowlands (1997), “empowerment is more than participation in decision-making;
it must also include the process that lead people to perceive themselves as able and entitled to
make decisions” (1997;14).
2.3.5. Monitoring and Evaluation
This is an endless and regular review and management of the initiatives to ensure that inputs
work schedules, deliveries, target outputs and other necessary actions continue consistent with
the project. It involves continuous method of gathering information at systematic intervals about
ongoing initiatives regarding the type and their performance.
According to Musumba 2013, Project monitoring is an on-going process while evaluation is
occasional and aims at addressing relevance, effectiveness and impact of projects. Monitoring
involves observing a project frequently, regularly and collecting project information on a timely
basis and sharing it with project stakeholders in the project under focus according to (Mulwa et
al, 2003). Monitoring is assessing a project from initiation to its implementation geared to
specific aims against agreed upon limits, specifications and requirements (Shapiro, 2013).
Monitoring considers the costs incurred, duration spent in the project, scope of the project, and
quality of outputs. Williams (2000) asserts that monitoring provides management and the main
stakeholders of a development intervention with indications of the extent of progress and
achievement of expected results and progress with respect to the use of allocated funds. The
monitoring and evaluation of the CDF projects were measured using the number of project
reports, number of visits and time of completion.
2.3.6. Completion and Non-completion of Constituency Development Funds Project
The completion of CDF projects; completion in this study refers to a project being handed over
to the community and it is delivering the goods and services it as intended for in the project
identification stage. Therefore, project completion in this study was measured using the project
completion reports and number of completed projects.

19
2.4. Theoretical Review of Literature Empirical literature
This section lays out a review of some of the related research and available theories and studies
that have been conducted in the past and recent years on the subject matter
There is plethora of literature on local government in Zambia, but there is paucity of literature
exclusively focusing on people’s participation in CDF process at local level. However, a few
research studies have been conducted on people’s participation at grass-root development
projects. Other works from outside Zambia that are related to the current study were also
reviewed. The core findings of those studies are pointed out here.
2.4.1. Local Perspectives
Madimutsa, (2006) in his dissertation, entitled Popular Participation in Poverty Alleviation,
Activities and Strategies in a Decentralized System of Government: A Case Study of Mumbwa
District in Zambia argues that “devolution of the government enables a variety of lower level
government institutions to be established to link local people to vital social services, such as, safe
drinking water, housing, education, food and health care”. Through a dual system of government
decentralisation, a variety of options are offered to the local people in order to participate in
poverty alleviation activities. This participation comes either through the deconcentrated sector
ministries or institutions of government that are devolved such as the District Council, Ward
Development Committees (WDCs), likened to RDCs today, and traditional rulers.
The work by Madimutsa (2006) show that devolved government institutions play a pivotal role
in the poverty alleviation activities through the process of employing a variety of participation
methods which include, among others, organising meetings with local people where discussions
on poverty alleviation are done and strategies of carrying them out. Contributions by the local
people are done through provision of local labour towards alleviating local poverty. Activities
such as brick molding and procurement of local materials such as building sand are all part of the
contributions from the local people. The work is important but not relevant to the research
question being investigated since the focus is on popular participation in poverty alleviation.
Nevertheless, lessons are drawn from this review that traditional rulers tend to attract a higher
percentage of people to participate in poverty alleviation than any other devolved government
institution such as local councils, WDCs or civil society organisations and, therefore, could
foster local participation for public service delivery. Further, although his focus is limited only to
poverty alleviation in general, his assertion that WDCs are vulnerable to political interference is

20
justified, as these units which are meant to link the people to local authorities, causes people to
shy away from participating in local affairs. The study helps to explain the role of local
governance institutions in service delivery, as it demonstrates how important these institutions
link the people to municipalities.
Folotiya (2000) in her undergraduate law degree research project report found out that the
development of an efficient, transparent, accountable and participative local government will
help develop and enhance democracy in Zambia. She observes that “the Zambian government
accepts that it needs to decentralise the system of local government as a method of enhancing
democracy. The development of democracy and decentralisation of local government are viewed
as a means of improving the provision of services by the public sector and thereby the quality of
life of citizens” (Folotiya, 2000: P 50).
Further, she argues that leaders and decision-makers are supposed to be accountable to the
citizens for their words and actions. She points out that citizens have the democratic right to
criticise their rulers, to exercise freedom of association so that demands are made on their rulers
and in the end win their support for the policies they advance and by so doing people are able to
participate in the democratic process. The 1991 Local Government Act provides for the system
of local administration. The elected council represents the citizens and council meetings are
convened to make decisions on the provision of services to the public.
Folotiya argues that lack of commitment on the part of central and local government to educate
and sensitise the citizens on their civic obligation, is the major cause for lack of participation in
local affairs by the citizens. She further argues that central government’s efforts to
democratically decentralise local government have led to the deconcentration and not the
devolution of decision-making authority. She concludes by stating that these efforts by
government to enhance democracy at the local government level have not been effective mainly
due to lack of political will from central government.
A report on Fiscal Decentralisation and Local Government Finance in relation to infrastructure
and service provision in Zambia by Saasa, O. S, et al. (1999: P 163) reads: “It is important to
observe that, in the Zambian case, observed weaknesses in the level of quality of infrastructure
and service provision are sometimes more a function of institutional, Organisational, and
resource capacity limitations than the absence of regulatory and legislative frameworks. Equally

21
observed are the facts that deliberate flouting of laid down procedures and legislation has been
evident at both the level of central government as well as sub-national government authorities.”
Folotiya (2000) concurs with the observation of Saasa (1999) and his colleagues for she argues
that the legal framework for an effective local government does exist in Zambia, save for some
of the sections that need to be repealed in the 1991 Local Government Act. Some of these critical
areas of governance in the section relate to the reduction of central government’s control on local
government. She argues that central government’s control on local government has, for example,
been exercised through the determination by central government of acceptance of council
minutes and resolutions, approving of council bye-laws and property rates. The dissolution of
council for failure to function is done by the Minister in charge of local government who
performs duties on behalf of central government. The findings in the study by Folotiya provide
insights and important lessons on the reform process from the legal standpoint. Her findings also
help to explain legislation framework as provided for in the 1991 Act. She argues that the MMD
government’s efforts in the reform process aimed at democratizing the local government system
for improved local level participation and service delivery. However, Folotiya‟s study does not
specifically focus on local level participation and decentralisation of service delivery but rather
central government’s policy reforms on the democratization of local government system.
Malama, (2009), in his master’s dissertation entitled ‘The Utilisation of Constituency
Development Funds (CDFs) in Kabwata: A Participatory Communicative Appraisal‟ points out
that whilst local community involvement in CDF projects is promoted, knowledge about the fund
is limited. This ultimately will influence the suitability and appropriateness of projects at a
grassroots level, and the ability to achieve sustainable community development. There exists no
deliberate communication strategy by the council or the sub district structure to create awareness
and encourage residents to participate in CDF projects. Malama‟s work is helpful because it
reveals the communicative strategies involved in the utilisation of CDF in Kabwata. The current
study seeks to investigate the nature of participation.
Musenge (2013) in her master’s thesis, entitled An assessment of the role of participatory
planning in the attainment of community owned CDF projects: a case of Butondo street lighting
project observes that, though the CDF community projects (e.g. Butondo street lighting)
supposedly adopted a participatory planning approach during its planning and implementation
process, it was unable to attain community owned projects, as the planning process had been

22
more of „rational planning‟ in nature than „participatory planning‟ as purported by the Zambian
government. Most interesting still, the research identified a unique pattern of stakeholder’s
participation during the CDF projects‟ planning process; the community was just involved
during the first stage (project identification) of the planning process and later on was totally
excluded from the planning process leaving only the local authority in the process. This type of a
planning process (rational planning) resulted into the stakeholders not building strong
relationships that would have necessitated for the formation of project steering committees (to
spearhead project’s activities) and collective actions/decision making. This scenario ultimately
results into the lack of „community ownership‟ of the implemented CDF project which was
evidenced by the desertion or non-participation of the community in the operation and
maintenance of the project thus, leaving the entire responsibility to the local authority. In
additional, exogenous factors such as CDF guidelines (rules), resources, time and centralized
power vested only in the full council committee, also adversely affected the full participation of
stakeholders in the process, thus, making the participatory planning process in the form of
„rational planning‟ The process became more closed, rigid and sequential in nature, and
provided for no formation of vital actor relations. This scenario resulted into the lack of
community ownership of the street lights project. This lack of community ownership of the street
light project resulted into the community vandalising and stealing project’s fittings immediately
after its implementation by the contractor. This situation made the project non sustainable.
Musenge‟s work was important to this research because it highlighted some of the challenges
faced by the communities in participatory planning process. This research benefitted from the
literature because it sought to find out what factors influence community participation in CDF
projects in Lusaka. The research by Musenge focused on the planning process, there was also
need to find out if the community was involved in other activities of the project such as
implementation and monitoring of the project activities. Therefore, this research sought to fill the
identified gaps.
The Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) and Micah Challenge Zambia conducted joint
research, with the support of Tearfund, to establish how transparency and participation in the use
of the Constituency Development Fund impacted service delivery. The research was carried out
in 11 constituencies in six provinces of Zambia between October and December 2012. The
majority of positive experiences of CDF and cases demonstrating better use of funds were in

23
constituencies where transparency and participation were key elements of the CDF process. The
research found numerous challenges associated with the CDF and which need to be addressed, if
it is to have the impact on development. Intended among these challenges were, lack of
transparency in CDF processes led to reduced community participation and the loss of funds and
materials, awareness of the CDF guidelines was mainly limited to those involved in the CDF
process, rather than the wider community. There was a lack of transparency in decision-making
as CDF committees did not provide citizens with detailed explanations as to why certain projects
were funded or rejected. The procurement of CDF materials was not transparent, arousing
suspicion. In most constituencies, the local authorities did not use the suppliers or materials
suggested in the CDF application and did not provide an explanation for their choice of supplier.
The study found a lack of community participation in the majority of CDF processes, which
often resulted in unfinished or inappropriate projects: In some cases, citizens were not aware of
CDF procedures or involved in identifying CDF projects. This led to inappropriate CDF projects
which were unwanted and left unused.
According to the same findings, the structure of the CDF process creates the potential for undue
political interference: The involvement of the MP breaches the principle of separation of powers
by conferring parts of the executive function on the legislator. This contributes to political
clientelism and means that the MP is managing government funds, rather than representing
citizens and holding the executive accountable. The majority of the CDF committee – four
members – are directly „selected‟ by the MP, so the committee is not representative of
stakeholders in the constituency. Furthermore, less than one per cent of respondents knew of the
existence of the CDF committee, which raises questions about accountability.
The work by Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) and Micah Challenge Zambia is
important because it highlights numerous challenges, including insufficient transparency
throughout CDF processes, lack of community participation and undue political influence
exerted by elected representatives. However, the factors attributed to this lack of participation are
not clearly stated. This research also probed the knowledge, attitude and perception of people in
Lusaka district towards participation in CDF projects.
A study by the Economic Association of Zambia (EAZ) 2011 had the objective of assessing the
impact of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) with a view to examining how its
processes may be reformed to strengthen local governance structures in order to enhance the

24
implementation of wider fiscal decentralisation initiatives and develop local councils‟ capacities
in the context of sector devolution. According to the findings, the direct impact of CDF funded
projects on poverty alleviation was very minimal. Constraints relating to financial resources
necessary for effective monitoring of, and in some cases insufficient capacity among
communities to undertake incoming-generating activities greatly undermine the potential for
such activities to make a significant contribution to poverty alleviation. Consequently, CDCs
were usually afraid to approve projects of income-generating nature especially those relating to
the rearing of livestock or poultry such as goats, pigs, and chickens and yet such activities, if
properly managed, can have a direct and positive impact on poverty alleviation. It is, therefore,
very important that capacity to venture into such projects is ascertained or built before hand in
order to guarantee project success. In this respect, the intervention of relevant government line
ministries, significant impact on communities. The study also observed that because of this
desire by local politicians to get a share of every CDF allocation, many projects are usually given
funding in phases, a situation which has resulted in an array of uncompleted projects. Effective
monitoring and financial accountability of these projects is adversely affected. Income-
generating projects, especially for women’s groups, such as chicken rearing and tailoring, are the
most notorious with regard to failure and the lack of financial accountability. The involvement of
formal and critical structures in the “official” CDF project approval process is greatly
undermined because of the politics and vested interests which characterise the CDF. In this
respect, the District Development Coordinating Committee (DDCC) and its Planning Sub-
Committee is largely used to rubberstamp decisions that have already been made by the
politicians - MPs and councilors - and their supporters. Their role to scrutinise proposed projects
and to carry out desk and field appraisal is largely ignored. The influence of MPs has, in some
instances, resulted in the implementation of good community projects.
The work by EAZ is important because it shows the impact of CDF on reduction of poverty in
Zambia and it further reveals constraints to achieving the desired impact of CDF on poverty
alleviation among this was a lack of community participation. It, however, does comprehensively
highlight the factors that account for poor participation in CDF projects which this research seeks
to investigate.

25
2.4.2. Global Perspectives
Otieno (2013) Deepening Democracy at the Grassroots Level: Citizen Participation in State
Devolved Funds (CDF) In Kenya explains recurrent pitfalls faced by the CDF program in its
attempts to establish democracy at local levels through enhanced citizen participation. The
research findings reveal major structural shortcomings within the CDF which are antithetical to
citizen participation within the CDF program. The primary structural misnomer bedevilling the
CDF program is powers (functions as the structural-functionalist approach terms it) bestowed on
the MPs to unilaterally appoint the fifteen committee members. The findings also reveal the
hurdles of citizen participation occasioned by the powers vested on MPs under Article 23(1) of
the CDF Act to appoint committee members. First, even though in overall citizens happen to
know committee members, citizen knowledge of committee members in the urban constituency
is extremely low, thereby suggesting that MPs do not consult much with local citizens while
appointing the committee members. This, in essence, means that committee members do not
necessarily represent interests of citizens as stipulated in the Act. Even where some form of
citizen-committee member discussion exists, it is extremely low more so in the urban
constituency. Most importantly however, is the fact that such discussions fall below the desirable
qualities of meaningful deliberation.
The literature by Otieno (2013) was important to this research because it provided information
on the structural shortcomings within the CDF which are antithetical to citizen participation
within the CDF. However, the research by Otieno was carried out in Kenya which could have
different social and economic as well as political characteristics from those of Zambia.
Kariuki and Misaro (2012) in their study entitled Economic Status and Participatory
Development in Kenya found that, while most respondents had high literacy levels, they also
suffered severe socio-economic deprivation. CDF projects had contributed to setting up school
bursaries, dispensaries, creating employment opportunities and efficient transport. Furthermore,
respondents were aware of the role of CDF funds. Yet, participation in CDF projects, seminars,
workshops or educational tours was generally low. Lack of transparency was mentioned as the
major factor influencing low participation levels.
The literature analysed the socio-economic factors influencing participation in CDF projects
based in Ol-kalou Constituency, Nyandarua District in Kenya. Apart from not being the only
factors that affect participation by locals, it was noted that socio-economic factors differ

26
according to regions. As such, the findings of the study may not be generalised to all regions in
Kenya or beyond. Nevertheless, the study provides a framework for identifying and analysing
factors that influence community participation in development projects.
The International Budget Partnership (IBP) Constituency Development Funds: Scoping Paper
(2010) observes that one of main arguments in favour of CDFs is that the institution enables
greater involvement by citizens in identifying development priorities. The key measures of
public participation being the representivity of the CDC committee and the inclusivity of the
processes used for project identification and selection.
Development agencies and authors distinguish different dimensions, spaces, degrees and levels
of participation. The typology of participation, which positions participation on a seven step
ladder is useful in analysing these degrees of participation (Kumar, 2002; Pretty et al., 1995).
People should be able to participate directly in development efforts in order to succeed in
strategies and programmes to alleviate poverty (Oakley et al., 1991).
Arnstein (1969: 216-224) explains that citizen participation is the categorical term for citizen
power. She explains that it is the redistribution of power that enables the have-not citizens,
presently excluded from the political and economic processes, to be deliberately included in the
future. It is the strategy by which the have-nots join in determining how information is shared,
goals and policies are set, tax resources are allocated, programs are operated and benefits like
contracts and patronage are parcelled out. She further explains that there is a difference between
going through the empty ritual of participation and having the real power needed to affect the
outcome of the process. She explains this difference using the eight levels of participation in
what she terms „the ladder of citizen participation‟
She argues that the bottom rungs of the ladder are manipulation and therapy. These two rungs
described levels of non-participation that have been contrived by some to substitute for genuine
participation. The real objective is not to enable people to participate in planning or conducting
programmes, but to enable power holders to relate „educate‟ or „cure‟ the participants. Rung 3
and 4 progress to levels of „tokenism‟ that allow the have-nots to hear and have a voice: (3)
Informing and (4) Consultation. When they are preferred by power holder as the total extent of
participation, citizens may indeed hear and be heard. But under these conditions they lack the
power to ensure that their views will be headed by the powerful. Rung (5) Placation is simply the
higher level of tokenism because the ground rules allow have nots to advise, but retain for the

27
power holder the continued right to decide. She suggests that further up the ladder are levels of
citizen powers with increasing degrees of decision making clout. Citizens can enter into a (6)
partnership and enables them to negotiate and engage in traditional power holders. At topmost
rungs, (7) Delegated Power and (8) Citizen Control, have not citizens obtain the majority of
decision-making seats, or full managerial power (Arnstein, 1969).
Bretty (2003, p.5) conceptualises these levels in terms of weak and strong participation.
According to his views, weak participation involves “informing and consulting” while strong
participation means “partnership and control”. He argues that, in practice agencies managing
complex projects find it hard to move from the „weak end‟ of the continuum and tend to assume
that, intended beneficiaries will be consulted during the project design to take into account their
felt needs and aspirations. Wilcox (1994) cautions that, information giving and consultation are
often presented as participation leading to disillusionment among community interests.
Conclusion of literature review
From the literature reviewed from both Zambia and other countries, the general observation is
that most of the studies have indicated that implementation of Constituency Development Fund
has encountered a number of operational and structural challenges amongst, which include poor
community participation and contribution to projects. The literature also revealed that
community participation in identification, implementation and monitoring of CDF projects is key
to the success of such projects. This is because community participation is seen as an effective
strategy of managing public affairs This study was necessitated by the fact that most of the
researches that have been done have revealed that the level of community participation in
constituency development fund projects at the constituency level is low. This study, therefore,
tackles the issue of the level of community participation in CDF projects by looking at the ways
in which the community can participate in CDF projects. This study does not merely look at the
participation of the community in CDF projects but it goes a step further to find out the factors
that account for the level of community participation in CDF projects in Lusaka and Kabwata
constituency in particular.

28
 CHAPTER THREE:

3.0. PROPOSED METHODOLOGY

3.1. Study Design
This study will be both descriptive and explanatory in terms of its design. Descriptive research is
the type of inquiry that deals with the collection and analysis of data for the purpose of
describing and interpreting existing conditions, and on-going process, current practices and
attitudes (Bless and Achola, 1988). According to Research methods by Cresswell (2007),
descriptive studies focus on determining a deeper understanding or implication of a given
phenomenon. The study will also be explanatory in that it will examine some potential
cause/effect relationships between some variables. Both qualitative and quantitative data were
used in this research (Mixed method approach).
3.2. Study Site
The study will be conducted in Kabwata constituency area of Lusaka province. It will focus on
the constituency development funded projects in Kabwata parliamentary constituency in the
district of Lusaka city.
3.3. Target Population
Kabwata Constituency has a total population of 22, 537 people from which the respondents were
selected (Central Statistical Office 2016). The study will have a total of 100 respondents
(household respondents) and the key informants mentioned. The respondents will be categorised
into two, key informants and the household respondents. The key informants will be able to
provide us with information such as the type of projects that had taken place in Kabwata
constituency and how local people community participated in those projects. The key informants
will consist of Ward Development Committee members; Councilors, Lusaka city council. The
household respondents will be picked from households in different wards but all in Kabwata
Constituency.
3.4. Sampling Technique
To conduct this study, the researcher will use purposive sampling also known as judgmental
sampling. This is a non- probability sampling method which is based on the judgment of the
researcher regarding the characteristics of a representative sample. The study will employ
systematic sampling for household respondents. This is to enable target all wards from Kabwata

29
constituency. From these wards, the study will purposively select a household and choose a
direction in which to go. After that, five will be selected as an interval of sampling.
Therefore, every 5th household will be sampled. Cresswell (2007) alludes that purposive
sampling is ideal for selecting samples that have likely characteristics. It therefore, gives
relevance to a study which has special interest on a given population. It is based on this, that the
study will adopt the purposive sampling technique, as it has interest on specific type of groups.
3.6. Inclusion Criteria
In order to collect firsthand information about Kabwata Constituency all individuals that are in
the community leadership structures both in the formal and informal manner as well as ordinary
members of the community in Kabwata constituency area in the district of Lusaka will be
included in the study.
3.6.2. Exclusion Criteria
In order to operate within the dictums of research ethics, all individuals that will NOT consent to
participating in the study will NOT be included in the study.
3.7 Data collection methods and tools
The study will employ a number of research tools including qualitative research methods such as
informal and semi-structured interviews and observation. Qualitative research allows a
researcher closer involvement with study participants; it allows for small number of cases to be
studied and openness to multi sources of data. It is also flexible as it allows for adjustments and
necessary changes where need be (Babbie and Mouton, 2001). The use of qualitative methods is
intended to help the researcher to gain an in-depth understanding study as it allows for more
detailed discussion by and involvement of the respondents. The researcher will use semi
structured interviews, questionnaires and also carry out unobtrusive observation to collect data.
Data will be collected from both secondary and primary sources.
3.7.1 Primary Data
Data will be collected from both primary and secondary sources. Interviews and semi-structured
questionnaires will be used in primary data collection. Data from key informants such as ward
councillors and representatives of Constituency Development Fund Committees will be used as
interview guides. Interviews are being because of their nature provide a base for face to face
encounters between the researcher and informants directed towards understanding informants’
perspectives on their experiences or situations as expressed in their own words. Interviews will

30
make it easy for me to also explain questions to the respondent thus leading to in- depth and
accurate information because of the lengthy time likely to be spent with the informant.
Data from households will be collected using questionnaires. The questionnaires which will
consist of both closed and open ended questions to be administered to respondents in the
constituency. Questionnaires will help ensure consistence and easy data analysis while ensuring
less bother on the respondents and give them assurance of confidentiality.
3.7.1.1 Focus Group Discussions
A focus group is a group interview involving a small number of demographically similar people.
Their reactions to specific researcher-posed questions are studied. Focus groups are used in
market research and studies of people's views. The discussions can be guided or open. They can
concern a new product or something else. The idea is for the researcher to learn about the
participants' reactions. If group members are representative of a larger population, those
reactions can be expected to reflect the views of that larger population. Thus focus groups
constitute a research method that researchers organize for the purpose of collecting qualitative
data, through interactive and directed discussions.
Some strengths of FGDS include; their ability to measure reactions of participants and not just
opinions; their format, questions, and style can be replicated in different places, cultures, and
communities to provide a scalable form of market and social research. Additionally, FGDs are
also time-saving due to the ability to engage more than one respondent at the same time; and also
facilitates the collection of rich in-depth data as respondent verbatim is not limited by a
questionnaire, and you can also further prompt respondents to give more in-depth responses
when need be.
On the other hand, various weaknesses associated with FGDs include; dishonest/bias of
responses due to lack of privacy especially for sensitive topics that have political affiliation;
coordination and planning is quite costly; potential bias of the moderator may affect the quality
of participant responses; some participants are more outgoing than others hence findings may
sometimes only reflect feedback from the more outgoing participants and may not have proper
representation if others were not participating.
3.7.1.2 Questionnaire
This method involves the use of written questions that are presented to the respondent. These are
to be answered by the respondent in a written form. Two types of questionnaire surveys are
available. According to [ CITATION Syd15 \l 1033 ], the two types include; self-administered
31
questionnaire posted to the respondent and returned completed; and an administered
questionnaire delivered by the interviewer.
There are two types of questions:
Open-ended: These are questions which permit free responses that should be reported in the
respondents’ own way i.e. the respondent is not given possible answers to choose from. This is
important when the researcher wants to get information on opinions, attitude and reactions to
sensitive questions [ CITATION Syd15 \l 1033 ].
Closed-ended or structured questions: This offers a list of options from which respondents
must make a choice of what is most suitable. The options must be exhaustive and stiff [ CITATION
Syd15 \l 1033 ].
Some advantages associated with questionnaire use include the following; cost saving as they
can be sent via email or post, delivery is much quicker, they are easily scalable thus making it
easy to reach large target samples. Other benefits include; the ability to maintain respondent
anonymity, flexibility for respondents over where and when to complete their questionnaire, and
higher data accuracy.
Conversely, some disadvantages associated with questionnaire use include; differences in
understanding and interpretation of questions by respective respondents, unanswered questions,
and some questions can be difficult to analyze, limited ability to capture feelings and emotions of
respondents, some respondents may be difficult to access at times and some may also experience
questionnaire fatigue.
3.7.1.3 Participant Observation
This method of data collection is commonly used in studies relating to behavioral sciences.
According to [ CITATION Syd15 \l 1033 ], observation becomes a scientific tool and the method of
data collection for a researcher, when it serves a formulated research purpose, is systematically
planned and recorded and is subjected to checks and controls on validity and reliability. Once the
researcher joins the organisation, the aim would be to learn all their behavior and habits. This
involves total immersion in the group being studied [ CITATION Syd15 \l 1033 ]). For example,
within the construction industry, the observer would join an organisation with the aim of
studying the construction processes.
The various strengths of observation include; simplest method of data collection, it is universal,
it is useful for framing the research hypothesis, it provides greater accuracy for the data

32
collected. Additionally, Observation can deal with phenomena which are not capable of giving
verbal information about their behaviour, feeling and activities simply for the reason that they
cannot speak such as infants or animals, Observation does not require the willingness of the
people to provide various information about themselves.
On the other hand, various disadvantages include; some of the occurrences may not be open to
observation; not all occurrences open to observation can be observed when observer is at hand.
Observation may also lack reliability because social phenomena cannot be controlled or used for
laboratory experiments, generalizations made by observation method are not very reliable.
Others include factors such as; personal bias of the observer, slow investigation, expensive due
to time and effort mostly used, and can also be an inadequate method due to difficulty in
checking validity.
3.7.1.4 Key informant interviews
This is a data collection method that involves the administration of oral questions to individuals
or groups. It involves an inter-personal relationship between the interviewer and the interviewee.
This method has, however, its own advantages and disadvantages ( [ CITATION Syd15 \l 1033 ] . Its
advantages being that it incorporates illiterate respondents, permits clarification of issues and
gives a higher response rate than written questionnaires. Disadvantages of the method include;
the influence of the responses created by the presence of the interviewer; reports of events being
incomplete as in the case of observation; the costly nature of personal interviews in terms of time
and money; and the danger of serious disparities is likely if more than one interviewer is used as
it reduces comparability of responses

3.7.2. Secondary Data

Secondary data will be collected from written sources on the subject of interest that other
organizations have implemented and other material that are relevant for this research. This data
may come from literature from within previous peer reviewed research, annotated bibliographies,
research, organizational and ministerial report publications, web pages and journals. In addition,
internet search, library search will also be used to collect the data. The data will be screened to
identify outliers, miscoding, missing or any other anomalies to improve performance of the
analytical method. In order to establish the reliability of the data, the researcher will obtain
information on how the data was collected from respective institutions.

33
Hard copy data will be managed using data base files where all collected noted responses will be
kept and soft copy data will be managed by using personal computer spread sheet such as excel.
Both hard and soft copy data will be managed under strict confidentiality and will only be
accessed by the principle investigator.

3.8. Data Analysis

The data collected from the questionnaire will be cleaned and checked for uniformity,
consistency and accuracy. Questions will be coded for ease of data analysis. Considering the fact
that our research will also collect quantitative data, the analysis and interpretation of data will be
done with the help of computer software and statistical tools such as Microsoft Excel (Ms excel)
and Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 20. This is because this software’s
particularly SPSS gives detailed data analysis such as percentages, graphs, tables that aid in data
interpretation. Additionally, these softwares, particularly SPSS are user friendly and have enough
space for a long range of numbers and numbers can easily be calculated using its in-built
functions (Kelvin, 2005). Graphical presentation of data as well as testing for correlation will be
done with the use of the software.

34
 CHAPTER FOUR

PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS
4.01 Introduction
Your results presentations has to first start with your participants bio data results I terms of age, sex,
level of education and son and so forth.

This chapter establishes the nature and level of community participation in CDF projects. The
objective is to establish the current nature of local people’s in,volvement in identification,
implementation, and monitoring of CDF projects. This chapter also establishes the level of
community participation in CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency. It was important to carry out
such an assessment given that CDF projects are supposed to reflect the priority needs of the local
people and community participation in project identification, implementation and monitoring.

The study found that there are four main ways in which the community in Kabwata Constituency
participates in CDF projects. These were identified as, firstly participation during the
identification of projects. Secondly, participation during project implementation and thirdly,
through community involvement in project monitoring activities. Fourthly, Community

35
participation in CDF projects is also assured through the local representatives who sit on the
CDC, membership on project implementation committees.

4.1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Figure 4.1: SEX of Respondents

Sex of Respondents

Males Female
48% 45%

none response
8%

The above graph depicts the portion of respondents that took part in the study. 48 % of the
respondents that took part in the study were males, while 45 % of the respondents that took part
were female. 7 % of the respondents did not fully partake in the study as they did not complete
parts of their questionnaire or non-responses.

Figure 4.2: Distribution according to Age Group

60%

50% 52%

40%

30%
26%
20% 22%

10%

0%
21-30 Years 31-40 Years 41 Years and above

Source: Field Data

36
According to the above figure, most of respondents (52 %) were between 21-30 years of age,
while a low threshold of respondents (22%) were 41 years of age and above.

Figure 4.3: Distribution according to Highest level of Education

No
Response
9%
Tertiary/Coll
ege
15%

Primary
57%

Secondary
19%

Primary Secondary Tertiary/College No Response

Source: Field data

According to the pie chart above, a majority threshold of 57% of respondents had reached
secondary school education, while 19 % and 15% of the respondents had attained primary school
education and Tertiary/College education, respectively. In addition, 9% of total respondents in
the study did not indicate their highest level of education attained.

4.2 Participation in CDF project identification

During project identification stage once projects have been identified, the WDC together with
some community members with project proposal writing skills develop project proposals. The
Kabwata CDC chairperson explained that after the meetings, once the project proposals are
ready, they are submitted to the Ward Development Committees (WDC) in their respective
wards. After receiving the proposals, WDC then applies for funds using either the Ward
development fund or the Constituency Development Fund.

37
Respondents were asked if they had ever attended any meetings that were called in their
constituency to identify projects to be funded using CDF. The responses are given below.

Figure 4.41 responses of community members who have ever attended meetings to identify
projects to be funded using CDF.

78%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0% 19% 5%
10.0%
0.0%
yes no non response

Source: Primary Data

The study found that attendance of public meetings for identification of CDF projects was low.
It was established that only the minority of the household respondents had ever attended public
meetings. As illustrated in figure above, out of the 100 sampled ordinary residents, only (19
percent) of the household respondents indicated that they had attended meetings within the
constituency where the identification of CDF projects was being discussed, while (76 percent)
of the household respondents indicated that they had not attended any meetings within the
constituency and (5 percent) of the household respondents did not give a response on whether
had attended these meetings or not.

The study observed that members of the public are not pro-active in the identification of CDF
projects. Majority of the respondents admitted that they had not attended any meeting that had to
do with CDF in their constituency. Many respondents observed that there is a very limited
opportunity for citizens‟ participation through the local structures. More often than not there are
no clear channels on how the citizens are supposed to participate. If they are there, they are not
known to the ordinary people. Other respondents attributed the lack of attendance in meetings to

38
a general lack of channels for educating the citizens on the importance, means and opportunities
for participation hence the low attendance.

On the basis of the information provided by the respondents, it has been established that,
community participation in the project identification stage of CDF projects ranges from passive
to participation by consultation‟. This limited nature of community involvement in problem
identification could also be viewed as „weak participation‟ as it does not lead to people’s
empowerment. These findings are more or less similar to what Pretty (1995) had observed in a
study involving 230 rural development institutions employing some 30,000 staff in 41 countries
in Africa, where he found that participation for local people was most likely to mean simply
having discussions or providing information to external agencies.

4.3 Participation in CDF project implementation

The CDF Committee chairperson indicated that, there are three ways in which the community
participates in CDF projects implementation. Firstly, through the use of local labour, secondly
through the respective community’s contribution of materials to the projects and thirdly through
the use of local contractors. During CDF project implementation, emphasis is placed on using
local labour and materials and local representatives to assess progress. In order to ensure
community participation in CDF projects, local contractors are encouraged to apply whenever a
tender is advertised for local projects.

The figure below indicated the level of community participation through implementation of CDF
projects:

Figure 4.52 Responses showing respondents who have ever participated in implementation
of CDF projects

39
 83.0%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30% 17%
20%
10%
0%
YES NO

Source: field data

Respondents were asked if they had ever participated in CDF projects implementation or if they
knew anyone from within the community who had participated in CDF project implementation.
The study found that out of 100 respondents (17 percent) respondents mentioned that they had
participated in the implementation process of at least one development project funded using
CDF. Whereas (83 percent) had never participated in the implementation of any CDF projects.

It was also indicated that community participation in form of labour involved both skilled and
unskilled labour. For instance, some respondents in Kabwata constituency had admitted that they
had participated in the construction of market shelter at Kabwata market; some had participated
in the Renovation of the ablution block at Kabwata clinic as well as the VCT block. The
respondents that had participated in the implementation of CDF projects said that their
participation was in form of unskilled labour. Those members of the community who provide
unskilled labour in the CDF projects are given jobs that require digging of drainages, laying of
pipes and backfilling the same.

Community members were further asked whether local residents contributed to the projects in
terms of labour in CDF projects. The results are presented in Table below:
Figure 4.63 Responses of respondents who have contributed labour to CDF projects

40
 42%

28%

19%

11%

Rarely Occasionally Always Never

Source: Primary Data

It is evident that (28%) said that community members are rarely given jobs on CDF projects,
(19%) indicated that they are occasionally provided with jobs, (11%) said that they are always
given jobs while (42%) indicated that they have never been offered employment by CDF
committees. This shows that some of the projects being implemented in Lusaka constituency do
not employ locals or in some cases they are given lesser roles as opposed to other people outside
the constituency. This could impact on the completion and sustainability of projects.

One of the respondents from Kabwata ward held the view that, “the participation of local people
in the implementation of CDF projects is important because they are the most affected by
poverty and are in need of development.” He further added that the community is supposed to
fully participate in the implementation of CDF projects because doing so allows them to take full
control of their own lives and reduce poverty in their communities.

The involvement of community members in the obtaining of building materials such as sand,
stones, and the molding of bricks, also constitutes the community’s contribution as provided for
in the CDF guidelines.

The CDF guidelines, among other things, recommend the use of both skilled and unskilled
community labour in the implementation of CDF projects. In practice, however, there seems to
be undue preference and over-utilization of unskilled and semi-skilled labour in the
implementation of most projects.

41
The study revealed that, just like in the case of community participation through skilled and
unskilled labour. Community participation through the contribution and procurement of
materials in CDF projects in Kabwata was also limited to the minority of the local residents. As
indicated in the figure 4.4, out of the 100 sampled (21 percent) of the household respondents
reported that they had contributed various materials to CDF projects. While (79 percent) of the
respondents indicated that they had never been involved in the procurement of materials used in
CDF projects. The results are presented in the figure below:

The study established that those who had contributed materials to CDF projects, their
contributions were in terms of blocks, stones, sand, cement, polls and iron roofing sheets. The
other respondents that had not being involved in the procurement of the materials said that they
were not aware of the process involved.

Figure 4.74 Responses showing Community involvement in the contribution of materials

for CDF projects

79%
80%

60%

40%
21%

20%

0%
yes
no

Source: Primary Data

4.4 Participation in monitoring of CDF projects

Respondents were asked if they have ever participated in the monitoring of CDF projects in their
community. The responses are presented in the figure below.

Figure 4.85 Responses of respondents who have participated in monitoring of CDF

42
Projects

21 % 16 %

Yes
No
No answer

63 %

Source: Primary Data

The responses shows that (63%) of respondents said that they have never been involved in
monitoring of CDF projects, (16%) said that they have involved in monitoring; whereas the rest
(21%) acknowledged that they did not know. The results show that there is low community
member’s involvement in CDF project monitoring.

The result shows that constituents are rarely involved in the scrutiny of projects being
implemented by CDF. Of those respondents who have been involved in monitoring of CDF
projects their form of monitoring was going back to check if what had been promised to them
was being implemented as they had agreed during project selection. It is hoped that by members
of the community monitoring these CDF projects will lead to accountability and ownership of
the projects.

Low citizen participation in the monitoring and evaluation of projects funded through CDF was
observed as having been caused by the approach to monitoring and evaluation of CDF projects.
The study observed that despite the CDF guidelines stating that the community should be
involved during the monitoring stage, the guidelines do not emphatically spell out the role that
community must play in terms of monitoring of CDF projects. The team from the DPU together
with area councilors and WDC are the ones that are actively involved in the monitoring of CDF
projects done by taking a trip round the constituency to review the projects implemented. As
such, members of the community do not have a clear role spelt out for them in monitoring of
CDF projects.

Based on the findings, the study established there is limited involvement of local communities in
CDF project monitoring despite the provisions of the Guidelines. Further, there is very limited

43
information that percolates to the sub-district level that the communities could use to make
decisions to monitor the progress or effectiveness of CDF projects. This is attributed to the lack
of information and communication channels which create an interface between the communities
and the Local Government.

The study also established that community participation in CDF projects was top-down since in
most technical stages such as monitoring and evaluation, the community was not fully co-opted
yet the stages proceeded without them implying that, there could be other technocrats who were
partaking without bothering much of the absence of the community. As such, indeed effective
community participation remains an elusive admiration especially if the community is not active
in every crucial stage of the project which in turn enhances a strong sense of ownership of the
project.

4.6 Factors Affecting Community Participation in CDF in Kabwata

ConstituencyCHAPTER FIVE:

DISUCSSION OF STUDY FINDINGS

5.0 Introduction

During the study respondents both community people and key informants and other community
representatives were asked to mention the factors limiting the community members from
effectively involving or participating in CDF projects in their constituency. The study identified
the following as factors limiting community participation in CDF processes in Kabwata
constituency.

54.6.1 Poor community awareness of CDF

For effective and relevant participation to take place, local people must be aware of the existence
of CDF projects in their communities. Further, the communities must know these projects and,

44
specifically, the ones in their wards. Community participation is likely to be effective when all
households are adequately informed about all issues on which their decisions and participation
are required.
This will mean implementing a 100 % information dissemination policy, using all available
media such as meetings, participatory sessions, radio, tapes, pamphlets and drama among them
(Milimo 2002).
Respondents were asked if they were aware of CDF projects in the constituency and their
responses are presented in the table below:
Table 4.1 Reponses showing awareness of CDF Projects

Response Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative

percent percent

Yes 35 35.7 35.7 35.7

No 64 64.3 64.3 100
Total 100 100 100

Source: Primary Data

The study found that one of the factors that account for the low level of community participation
in identification, implementation and monitoring of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency is
low levels of awareness of CDF within the Constituency.

As illustrated in table 4.1 above, it was found that out of 100 respondents (64.3%) were not
aware of CDF while (37.5%) where aware of CDF. The findings show that majority of the
respondents did not know or had not heard about CDF. The low levels of awareness about CDF
were attributed to the lack of publicizing of CDF projects by grassroots structures as well as the
local authority to communities at grassroots level. Despite the importance of this Fund, many
people are not even aware of CDF so that they are able to take part in projects that will improve
their lives.

54.6.2 Poor community knowledge about CDF

As already indicated, for effective and relevant community participation to take place, local
people must also have knowledge about CDF projects, then, they will be able to actively

45
participate. It follows that without relevant knowledge by members of the community about a
given project, it becomes difficult for them to participate.

The figure below shows responses of community member’s knowledge about various aspects
CDF.

Figure 4.96 responses showing community knowledge about CDF

YES NO

91%
74% 86%

68%

26% 32%

14%
9%

Source of the fund knowledge about knowledge of the

knowledge of the purpose of CDF CDF
guidelines amount disbursed
Source: field data

Even though one hundred and seven respondents (35.7%) indicated that they knew what CDF
was or had heard about CDF, the study found that majority of those respondents did not know
the details surrounding its source, its purpose, the role of the community in CDF and the
utilization of the fund in the constituency. 86% of the respondents from the local community
stated that they did not know how much the Fund was. 82% said they did not know how CDF
was appropriated and disbursed. 92% of the respondents did not know how to participate in CDF
projects. 91% do not know about the CDF guidelines.

The levels of knowledge about basic information concerning CDF were also found to be quiet
low. Not only did the respondents not know about what CDF amongst those were aware of the

46
fund, majority did not know the source of the fund. The fact that most respondents don’t know
what CDF is reveals to a large extent that CDF is invisible to the ordinary members of the
community. The respondents also exhibited ignorance of the about their role in CDF projects.
The study also revealed low awareness of CDF guidelines among the community may explain
the lack of community participation in most CDF processes as the community do not know their
rights and opportunities as provided by the guidelines.

On the basis of information provided by respondents of the study, the study established that most
of the respondents were unaware of CDF. Some reported of never hearing or having been
introduced to CDF and its processes before. This corresponds with the comments of Desai
(2002) when he argues that one of the factors that hinder communities from effectively
participating in development projects is lack of awareness about community programmes among
community members in developing and implementing various development projects.

54.6.3 Lack of community awareness of opportunities to participate in CDF projects

The respondents‟ level of awareness of their right and/or opportunities to participate in CDF was
assessed in respect to project identification, implementation and monitoring of CDF projects.
More than half of the respondents were not aware of the fact that they can participate in the
identification of CDF projects as well as implementation and monitoring of projects. However, a
much smaller proportion was aware of their rights to be part of CDF project processes.

This was illustrated in the graph below:

Figure 4.107 responses showing awareness of opportunities to participate in CDF projects

47
 90%
80%
70%
60%
50% Yes
40% No
30%
20%
10%
0%
project project project
identification implementation monitoring

Source: Field data

The study found that 66% said that they were not aware of opportunities of participation in CDF
project identification comparedidentification compared to 34% who said they knew of the
opportunities for participation in the CDF identification. In terms of project implementation, the
study found that 53% were aware of opportunities that were available for them to participate in
CDF project implementation Compared to 47% who said that they were not aware of any
opportunities. The study found that the level of awareness of opportunities in project monitoring
where the lowest among the three. 86% of the respondents said that they were not aware of any
opportunities for their participation in CDF project monitoring with only 14% admitting that they
were aware of opportunities in monitoring.
Most respondents in the study indicated that the majority of people in the community don’t know
that they have the right to participate in the development and governance processes both at
national and local levels.

48
54.6.4 Lack of awareness of structures through which local people participate in
Constituency Development Funds Projects in Kabwata Constituency
Respondents were asked if they were aware about the structures which they can use to participate
in CDF projects. The study found that majority of the respondents, were not aware of the
structures that they could use to participate in CDF projects.

The results are presented in the figure below:

Figure 4.118 Are you aware of structures that you can use to participate in CDF projects?

Yes
33%

No
67%

Source: Primary Data

The results reveal that 33% are aware of the structures that they can use to participate while, 67%
said they were not aware. The fact that 67% are not aware of the structures available for them to
participate in CDF projects suggests that to a great extent these institutions are not visible to the
ordinary members of the community. The lack of awareness of these structures means that the
structures are underutilized by the community members. Further, the ignorance exhibited by the
community members on the roles these structures play can be attributed to limited interaction
between these structures and community members.
In order to enhance participation local communities will need to be sufficiently sensitized to
play an active role in the CDF process. In this regard, sub district structures such as WDCs,

49
ADCs, and RDCs will need to take up the responsibility of sensitizing local communities. In
interviews conducted with the Key informants, it was revealed that the district council has put in
place structures through which local people can participate in CDF projects and they include
Ward Development Committees, Resident development Committees and Area Development
Committees. For effective management, each of these structures has a supervisor at its apex.
54.6.5 Limited Information and information dissemination
Respondents were also probed on their views regarding availability of information. This was
shown in the graph below:

Figure 4.129 Respondents views on availability of information

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%
agree not sure disagree

Source: Primary Data

The study revealed that another factor that hinders effective community participation in CDF
projects in Kabwata is lack of information. Respondents indicated that they feel there is lack of
access to information about CDF projects. From the research findings, majority of the
respondents (62%) disagreed with the view that all the information on CDF projects is available
and accessible to the community members, 5.5% were not decided while only 32.5% agreed that
such information is available.

50
Most of the respondents remarked that people’s involvement in CDF projects is constrained by
inadequate information; participants observed that community members hardly access
information on CDF projects that may be useful during identification, implementation and
monitoring of these projects. This has the potential of breeding corruption as there will be low
levels of vigilance among community members, thereby weakening monitoring and
accountability mechanisms.

5.64.8 Social economic reasons

Other reasons for the low levels of community participation in CDF projects given by the
respondents were attributed to social and economic reasons. Sixty-one (61) out of 100
respondents said they often do not participate in CDF projects due to social economic reasons.
Thirty-one (31) out of 100 respondents said they did not feel social economic factors hindered
their participation in CDF projects while seven (7) out of 100 said they just where not interested
in participating.

Some of the community members in Kabwata Constituency expressed that their busy daily
routine of earning a livelihood and subsequent noted that economic hardships hindered them
from taking part in CDF processes such as attending ward or constituency meetings. This is
because they are busy looking for jobs so that they can earn money to support their families.

This type of response was noted by Baum (1998), who pointed out that people generally want to
see a direct benefit for them to participate, or to have incentives offered. Even though the
respondents are aware of the problems, it is not seen as a priority or within their scope to do
anything about it, as their priorities are about jobs and supporting their families. As a result,
some of them would want to be paid for work done. Respondents recognized that many people
did not want to know or had the time to participate in CDF project. The CDF projects where not
considered a priority compared with the other problems families had to deal with.

5.74.9 Conclusion
This chapter has shown and revealed that it is important for local people to participate in
identification, implementation and monitoring of CDF projects in their communities. Based on
the information provided by the respondents of the research, the study has identified lack of
knowledge, lack of awareness about structures available for participation, limited information,
poor community attitudes and social economic factors as accounting for the level of community
51
participation in CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency. The study reveals a general low
awareness of CDF among community members, as well as low levels of knowledge of CDF
details with regard to costs of projects, amounts disbursed for specific projects and opportunities
of participation in the CDF processes. It has also revealed that community participation in
identification, implementation and monitoring of CDF projects is constrained by the lack of
awareness of structures available which the community can use to participate in CDF projects.
The study has revealed that the CDF is not as popular among the communities as it is expected to
be, given that the Fund has been around for more than a decade. There has not been sufficient
public sensitisationsensitization about the Fund. Consequently, it is common to find residents
living in close proximity to a CDF funded project who do not know that such a project was, in
fact, funded by the CDF. In such circumstances, the project/s is associated with the local
authority, the councillor or area MP, or a relevant sector ministry, this has an effect in
constraining the voices of the people, limiting people's rights to demand for accountability,
inclusion and participation in the CDF projects.

The study also revealed that community participation in monitoring of the CDF projects in
Kabwata Constituency is hindered by low knowledge and awareness on the CDF guidelines.

Equally, based on the information provided by key informants and household respondents, the
study has established that at the individual level, people do not actively participate in CDF
projects because of negative attitudes towards community participation in CDF projects because
they feel that their participation would not make a difference. Equally based on key informants
and household respondents, it was established that poverty is a barrier to effective community
participation, as people choose to go out looking for jobs so that they can earn money to support
their families.

More effective communication channels should be established between the community and
CDC. This will enable the CDC become aware of the needs of the community and, therefore, be
able to implement projects that address the community’s felt needs. Civic education is needed to
empower the community to understand the management of CDF and their role in making the
committees more accountable.

YOU NEED A DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS CHAPTER HERE

52
This is where you objectively answer your specific objectives with close connectivity between
your literature review and your findings, you need to prove if your results were similar to some
case studies you reviewed in your literature review or not, and try to critically give reasons for
why not or why so with much practical evidence from your field work, and since you adopted a
mixed method approach try as much as possible to represent both qualitative and quantitative
data from your field, infuse as muh as possible direct quotations and your bio data atleast should
represent information from your questionnaire.

CHAPTER SIXFIVE

SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

65.1 Summary of conclusions

Based on the findings, the study concluded that community participation in CDF projects
processes that is identification, implementation and monitoring is generally low. Based on the
responses of study respondents, the study has established that attendance of public meetings for
identification of CDF projects was low. As discussed, out of the 100 sampled ordinary residents,
only (19 percent) of the household respondents indicated that they had attended meetings within
the constituency where the identification of CDF projects was being discussed while (76 percent)
of the household respondents indicated that they had not attended any. The importance of
involving the people in projects identification and prioritization cannot be gainsaid if CDF is to
achieve the desired results. The lack of community participation at project identification level
leads to community members not owning local CDF projects a situation that stripes them of the
authority to monitor and evaluate CDF projects. As such, Local communities do not play an
active role in the monitoring processes.

The study concluded that community participation in CDF funded project implementation is low.
As discussed (17 percent) respondents mentioned that they had participated in the
implementation process of at least one CDF development project. Whereas (83 percent) had
never participated in the implementation of any CDF projects. Most of those respondents that
had participated said that their participation was in form of unskilled labour. For instance, some
respondents in Kabwata constituency had admitted that they had participated in the construction

53
of market shelter at Kabwata market; some had participated in the Renovation of the ablution
block.

The study concluded that community participation is also generally low in CDF project
monitoring. For instance, (63%) of respondents said that they have never been involved in
monitoring of CDF projects, (16%) said that they have involved in monitoring; whereas the rest
(21%) acknowledged that they did not know. The study observed that despite the CDF
guidelines stating that the community should be involved during the monitoring stage, the
guidelines do not emphatically spell out the role that community must play in terms of
monitoring of CDF projects.

The findings of the study point to the conclusion that most community members have never
taken part in the identification and implementation of CDF projects in Kabwata Constituency. In
addition, it means that they have not generally been encouraged and actively mobilized in the
actualization of these projects. And because they have not participated in the monitoring of these
projects, it can be concluded that the residents of Kabwata have not been actively involved in the
critiquing of the successes and failures of these projects.

The study also concluded that a number of factors account for the low level of community
participation in CDF projects among members of the community in Kabwata constituency. The
main factors given include lack of awareness and knowledge about CDF among community
members which resulted in people not knowing the projects financed by CDF. For instance, as
discussed, the study found that (64.3%) were not aware of CDF while (37.5%) where aware of
CDF. Showing that, there was a general low awareness of CDF among community members in
Kabwata constituency.

In addition, the study also found out that particular knowledge of CDF details with regard to
costs and amounts disbursed for specific projects was also generally low among the community.
In terms of levels of knowledge on CDF, it is apparent from the research that a lot needs to be
done in order to improve the understanding of members of the community as regards what the
fund is and where it comes from.
Low levels of understanding among those for whom CDF is intended leaves it open to abuse by
people in positions of influence, including MPs and councillors.

54
The study also pointed out that community participation in monitoring CDF projects has been
hindered by low knowledge and awareness on the CDF guidelines. This has an effect in
constraining the voices of the people, limiting people's rights to demand for accountability,
inclusion and participation in the CDF projects.

The study also concluded that lack of awareness of rights and opportunities for participation in
CDF projects also account for the low level of community participation. For instance, the study
found that 66% said that they were not aware of opportunities of participation in CDF project
identification as compared to 34% who said they knew of the opportunities for participation in
the CDF identification. In terms of project implementation, the study found that 53% were aware
of opportunities available for them to participate in CDF project implementation compared to
47% who said that they were not aware of any opportunities. The study found that the level of
awareness of opportunities in project monitoring was the lowest among the three. 86% of the
respondents said that they were not aware of any opportunities for their participation in CDF
project monitoring, with only 14% admitting that they were aware of opportunities in
monitoring.

As discussed, the study concluded that the poor community participation in CDF funded projects
in Kabwata constituency is also as result of the attitudes and perceptions that the local
community has towards participation.

65.2 Recommendations
The study recommends that sub-district structures such as WDCs, and ADCs and other structures
need to take up the responsibility of sensitizing local communities to enable them make informed
in order to increase community participation. There is need to increase community participation
in identification and prioritization of projects in order to actually address the real issues affecting
the people and create ownership of the projects among the people.

More effective communication channels should be established between the community and
CDC. This will enable the CDC become aware of the needs of the community and, therefore, be
able to implement projects that address the community’s felt needs.

55
These guidelines should, among other things stipulate formal communication avenues and/or
structures. Information on CDF must be spread widely using different channels and media of
communication. The study also recommends that information should be packaged separately and
uniquely for different audiences and target groups in a way and manner that is useful and usable.
Perhaps funds should be earmarked for publicity of CDF.

REFERENCES

Burns Roberts, B. (2000), Introduction to Research Methods, London, Sage

Corbetta, G. (2003), Social Research: Theory, Methods and Techniques, London, Sage

Dublin, R. (1969), Theory Building, New York, Fress Press

Durkheim, E. (1938), The Rules of Social Method, New York, Glencoe

Maxim, P.S., (1999), Quantitative Research Methods in Social Sciences, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press

Ngwisha, J.K. (2007), Social Research Methods: Theory, Methods and Techniques, Lusaka,
ZAOU

Chikulo, B (2009). Local governance reforms in Zambia: A review. Commonwealth journal of

local governance, 2: 98-106. (Available http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/ojs/index.php/cjlg. Accessed
17.01.2021.)

56
Dresang, D L (1975). The Zambia civil service: entrepreneurialism and development
administration. Nairobi: East African Publishing House.

Folotiya, T. (2000). An Analysis of the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy at the Local
Government Level, Research Report (LL. B), The University of Zambia.

Government Republic of Zambia (2006), Revised Guidelines on the Management and Utilization
of Constituency Development Fund, Ministry of Local Government and Housing, Lusaka

Green, M (2000). Participatory Development and the Appropriation of Agency in Southern

Tanzania. Critique of Anthropology 20 (1): 67–89.

Madimutsa Clever, (2006). Popular participation in poverty alleviation activities and strategies in
a decentralised system of Government. A case of Mumbwa District in Zambia. A dissertation
submitted to the University of Zambia in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Public Administration, The University of Zambia, Lusaka.

Malama, K. (2009). The Utilisation of Constituency Development Funds (CDFs) in Kabwata: A

Participatory Communicative Appraisal‟. A dissertation submitted tithe University of Zambia in
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Communication for
Development, The University of Zambia, Lusaka.

Swanepoel, H (2006). Community development: breaking the cycle of poverty. Lansdowne: Juta

57
 APPENDICES

Description of Activity December January February March April

2020
2021 2021 2021 2021

Identification of Topic

Literature Review

Formulation of
methodology and survey
tools

Pilot Testing of Data

Collection Tools

Submit Proposal for

Approval

Data Collection and

Analysis

Report Writing

58
Submit Final Report and
Thesis Defense

Appendix II: Proposed Budget

(i) STATIONARY

• Pens - K20

• Five reams of plain paper - K250

• Four highlighters at K5 - K20

• Four Note Books - K50

(ii) TYPING AND PRINTING

• Typing and printing (K1/Page) - K1000

• Binding proposal and Report - K 500

• Photocopying - K 2000

(iii) TRANSPORT

Fuel - K1000
Contingencies - K500

(iv) Internet Bundles and Talk Time - K600

(v) Food and Refreshments - K500

(vi) TOTAL - K6, 440

59
60
 QUESTIONNAIRE

INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire is divided into four (4) components or sections.

Section A and B: Should be answered by all the respondents.

Section C: is for management employees.

Section D: Councillors

Section E: Community Members

i.Please indicate your answer by ticking (√) in the appropriate box provided.

ii.Write your answer in the blank space provided

SECTION A: All Respondents

1. Gender Male □ Female □

2. Age bracket

i.18 – 22 years □
ii.23 – 27 years □
iii. 28 – 32 years □
iv.33 – 37 years □
v.38 – 42 years □
vi.43 – 52 years □
vii.Above 53 years □

3. Education level: Secondary

i.Grade Nine (9) □

ii.Grade Twelve (12) □

61
 4. Professional Education level

I. Certificate □

ii.Diploma □
iii. Degree □

iv.Masters □
v.PHD □
vi. If any other, please specify

………………………………………………………………………………………

5. Working experience:

i.1 month – 11 months □

ii.1 – 5 years □
iii. 6 – 10 years □
iv.11 – 15 years □
v.16 – 20 years □
vi.21 years and above □

SECTION B: General Information on Constituency Development Fund

6. Do you know what Constituency Development Funds (CDF) means?

i. Yes □
ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

7. Do you think the Constituency Development Fund released is used properly?

i. Yes □

ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

8. If YES to question 7 above, explain your answer.

62
………………………………………………………………………………………………

9. Has the Constituency Development Fund helped improve the welfare of the
citizens in your Community?

i. Yes □
ii.No □
iii. Do not know□
10. Do you think Constituency Development Fund should continue?

i. Yes □

ii.No □

iii. Do not know □

11. Is CDF an effective tool for decentralised development?

i. Yes □

ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

12.About how much CDF has been disbursed for developmental projects in your
community?

i.1,000 – 20,000 □
ii.20,001 – 40,000 □

iii. 40,001 – 60,000 □

iv. 60,001 – 80,000 □
v.80,001 – 100,000 □
vi. Above 100,001 □

13.Which types of developmental projects have been implemented in your community?

i. Roads □

ii. Schools □

63
iii. Clinics □

iv. Bridges □

v. All of the above □

vi. If not any of the above, please

specify………………………………………………………………………………

14. In your opinion, what are some of the common challenges in the implementation of
Constituency Development Fund projects?
i. Late and inadequate disbursement of funds
□
ii. Political interference
□
iii. Lack of involvement of the community in planning and identification of CDF projects
□
iv. Corruption □
v. Lack of monitoring and evaluation of the CDF projects □
vi. All of the above □

15. Kindly indicate with a tick (√) to the extent to which you agree with each of the
statement below based on the following brief explanations.

SA - Strongly agree, A – Agree, NS- Not Sure, D- Disagree, SD – Strongly disagree

No. Statement SA A NS D SD
- -1
–5 –3 –
4
2
1 Planning and identification of CDF
projects affects completion

64
 2 Planning and identification of CDF
projects affects non-completion

3 Allocation of CDF
affects

completion of Projects
4 Allocation of CDF affects
noncompletion of Projects

5 Political interference affects the

completion of CDF projects

6 Political interference affects the

non-completion of CDF projects

7 Monitoring and evaluation of CDF

projects affects completion of CDF
projects

8 Monitoring and evaluation of CDF

projects affects non-completion of

CDF projects

SECTION C: Management Employees

16. Does Planning and identification of CDF projects affect completion?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

17. If YES to question 16 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

65
 18. Does Planning and identification of CDF projects affect non-completion?
i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

19. If YES to question 18, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

20. Are CDF funds disbursed adequate to complete the CDF projects?

i.Yes □

ii.No□

iii. Do not know □

21. If YES to question 20, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

22. How does political interference affect completion of CDF projects?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

23. How does monitoring and evaluation of CDF projects impact completion of CDF
projects?

………………………………………………………………………………………………

SECTION D: Councilors

24. Does Planning and identification of CDF projects affects completion?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

25. If YES to question 24 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………
26. Does Planning and identification of CDF projects affects non-completion?

66
i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

27. If YES to question 26 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………
28. Does delayed allocation of CDF affect completion of CDF projects?
i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

29. If YES to question 28 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

30. Does delayed allocation of CDF affect non-completion of CDF projects?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

31. If YES to question 30 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

32. Does political interference affect completion of CDF projects?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

33. If YES to question 32 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

34. Does political interference affect non-completion of CDF projects?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

35. If YES to question 34 above, explain your answer.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

67
SECTION D: Community Members

36. Are you involved in planning and identification of CDF projects?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

37. Does your involvement in planning and identification of CDF projects affect completion
and non-completion? i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

38. If YES to question 37 above, explain your answer.

:………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………

39. Is there political interference in identification and implementation of CDF

projects?

i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

40. If YES to question 39 above, explain your answer.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………

41. Does political interference affect completion and non-completion of CDF

projects? i. Yes □ ii. No □

iii. Do not know □

68
42. If YES to question 41 above, explain your answer.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!

INTERVIEW GUIDE

1. Have you ever heard of a fund for the development of constituencies called Constituency
Development Fund (CDF)?

2. Do you know where the fund comes from and what the release mechanism is?

3. Is CDF well utilized and does CDF work for the community?

4. What do you know of that has been funded using CDF?

5. What structures are in place for selection and implementation of projects?

6. Are the local people involved in the selection and prioritization of the CDF projects?

7. What role does your community play in the identification or selection of CDF projects?

8. Are CDF projects based on the needs of your community?

9. Are the activities and the outputs of the CDF consistent with its intended objectives?

10. Are local community members in a position to monitor how CDF is spent?

11. Once CDF facilities have been completed, who is responsible for their maintenance?

12. How can the implementation of CDF be improved to ensure its effectiveness and
sustainability and how best can CDF to work for the people?

69