STUDY NOTES FOR

DECENTRALISING THE AFRICAN

STATE

Section A
Week 1 Readings
1. Federalism in Africa: An Indigenous Idea with a
Colonial History by Sara Jordan
Key concepts:
1. Federalism

Federalism can be defined as a system of governance that is grounded on the constitutional

division of power (shared power) between a central government and regional entities, such as
states and provinces.

Federalism is not indigenous to Africa, however the continent’s diverse ethnic groups and
historical kingdoms often had decentralised governance structures, resembling federalism in
some ways. However, the modern from of federalism in Africa has roots in colonial history
where European powers imposed centralised administrative structures on diverse nations
regions without regard for local governance traditions.

Post-colonial African nations adopted federalism as a way to manage ethnic diversity and
promote regional autonomy within the framework inherited from colonial rule. However, the
implementation and success of federalism in Africa have varied widely due to factors such as
ethnic tensions, resource distribution, and political stability.

• Decentralisation and centralization are two contrasting approaches to the

distribution of power and authority within a governance system

Decentralisation and centralization are two contrasting approaches to the

distribution of power and authority within a governance system:

1. Decentralization: Decentralization involves dispersing power and authority

away from a central authority to regional or local levels. In decentralized
systems, decision-making and administrative responsibilities are shared among
multiple entities, allowing for greater local autonomy and responsiveness to
local needs. Decentralization can promote efficiency, accountability, and
citizen participation in governance.
2. Centralization: Centralization, on the other hand, concentrates power and
authority within a central governing body or authority. In centralized systems,
decision-making and administrative control are held primarily by a single
entity or a small group of entities at the top of the hierarchy. Centralization
can lead to uniformity in policies and regulations across a territory, but it may
also reduce responsiveness to local concerns and limit opportunities for local
innovation and participation.

2. Confederation
A confederation is a political arrangement where independent states or entities come together
for mutual benefit, usually for purposes such as defense, trade, or governance, while retaining
a significant degree of sovereignty. Unlike a federation, where power is centralized with a
federal government, in a confederation, member states typically delegate limited authority to
a central body while maintaining a large degree of autonomy. Examples include the European
Union and the Swiss Confederation.

• Constitution of Iroquois as an example:

The Iroquois Confederacy, also known as the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, provides

an example of a confederation. Their constitution, known as the Gayanashagowa or
the Great Law of Peace, established a system of governance among the member
nations, including the Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and later the
Tuscarora. Each nation retained its autonomy but came together for common purposes
such as defense, diplomacy, and settling disputes. The Great Law of Peace outlined
principles of democracy, including a system of checks and balances, representation,
and decision-making through consensus among leaders.

3. Empire

An empire is a large political entity consisting of multiple territories or nations, usually under
the control or influence of a single ruler, government, or state. Empires often extend their
authority through conquest, colonization, or alliances. They typically have a centralized
government that exercises significant power over the territories they encompass. Examples of
historical empires include the Roman Empire, the British Empire, and the Ottoman Empire.

4. Confederative Cycle:

• Cycle explained

The confederative cycle is a theoretical framework proposed by political scientist

Alfred Stepan to describe the process through which a federal system may evolve into
a confederal one or vice versa:

1. Confederation Formation: The cycle typically begins with the formation of a

confederation, which is a loose union of sovereign states or regions with a
weak central authority. In this initial stage, member states retain significant
autonomy and often delegate only limited powers to the central authority.
2. Centralization Pressures: Over time, various factors such as external threats,
economic interdependence, or internal conflicts may create pressures for
centralization. These pressures can lead to the strengthening of the central
authority as member states seek to pool resources, coordinate policies, or
address common challenges more effectively.
3. Federalization: As centralization progresses, the confederation may evolve
into a federal system characterized by a stronger central government with
expanded powers and increased authority over member states. Federalization
often involves the establishment of shared institutions, the redistribution of
powers between the central and regional governments, and the development of
mechanisms for resolving conflicts between them.
 4. Decentralization Pressures: However, the process of centralization may also
generate counter-pressures for decentralization. Member states may become
concerned about the erosion of their autonomy or the dominance of the central
authority, leading to demands for greater regional self-government or the
reassertion of state sovereignty.
5. Confederalization: In response to these pressures, the federal system may
undergo a reversal of centralization, with powers being devolved back to the
member states. This process can result in the reemergence of a confederal
arrangement, where the central authority's powers are reduced, and member
states regain greater autonomy.
6. Repeat or Stability: The cycle may continue as centralization and
decentralization pressures interact over time, leading to a dynamic process of
federalization and confederalization. Alternatively, the system may stabilize at
a certain point along the spectrum between federalism and confederalism,
depending on the balance of political forces and institutional arrangements.

2. The federal idea and its contemporary relevance by

Ronald L Watts
Introduction

1. Contemporary Importance of Federalism: Federalism has gained increasing

importance in the contemporary world due to its potential to reconcile unity and
diversity within a single political system peacefully.
2. Dual Pressures for Larger and Smaller States: Modern developments such as
transportation, technology, globalization, and cultural identity have led to
simultaneous pressures for larger, more efficient states, and smaller, more responsive
political units.
3. Desires for Larger States and Distinct Identities: The desire for progress, economic
development, and global influence pushes for larger states, while the desire for
distinct linguistic, cultural, and historical identities drives the demand for smaller,
self-governing units.
4. Appeal of Federal Solutions: Federalism offers a solution by allowing shared
governance for common purposes at a larger scale while maintaining autonomy and
accountability at smaller levels of government.
5. Closest Institutional Approximation to Reality: Federal political systems best
approximate the complex multicultural and multidimensional reality of the
contemporary world.
6. Global Spread of Federalism: About two dozen countries today exhibit federal
characteristics, with around 40% of the world's population living in federations or
quasi-federal states.
7. Growing Interest in Federalism: There's a growing international interest in
federalism as a positive form of political organization, with examples like Belgium,
Spain, South Africa, Ethiopia, and Italy evolving towards federal structures.
 8. Evolution of Federal Systems: With changing world conditions, federal political
systems continue to evolve, with examples like the European Union developing a
unique hybrid of confederal and federal institutions.

The federal idea: the essential features

1. Definition of Federalism: Federalism involves two or more levels of government
combining elements of shared rule and regional self-rule, aiming to reconcile unity
and diversity within a larger political union.
2. Distinctive Characteristics of Federations:
o Federations feature multiple levels of government with shared rule through
common institutions and regional self-rule for constituent units.
o In federations, each level of government derives its authority directly from the
constitution, not from another level of government.
o Structural characteristics of federations include formal constitutional
distribution of powers, provision for regional representation, a supreme
written constitution, an umpire for constitutional interpretation, and
intergovernmental collaboration mechanisms.
3. Variations in Federations:
o Federations vary in cultural diversity, size and symmetry of constituent units,
distribution of responsibilities and resources, centralization, central
institutions, conflict resolution mechanisms, adaptation processes, roles in
international relations, and electoral systems.
4. Pragmatic Nature of Federalism: Federalism is a pragmatic technique whose
applicability depends on its adaptation to different situations and innovations in its
application.
5. Interaction of Society, Government, and Constitution:
o Federal systems are influenced by society, government, and constitution, with
dynamic interactions among these elements.
o The relationships between society, constitution, and political institutions
involve mutual interactions, shaping each other over time.
o Federal institutions and processes both reflect and influence societal dynamics,
channeling and influencing the articulation of unity and diversity within the
polity.

The varying popularity of the federal solution during the

past century
1. 1990s Onwards: Resurgence in Enthusiasm:
o A revival in enthusiasm for federal solutions emerged in the 1990s.
o Political leaders and intellectuals increasingly saw federal systems as
liberating and positive.
o Some Latin American countries restored federal regimes after autocratic rule,
while India's economic progress showcased coalition-based federalism as a
viable response to development challenges.
o Decentralization became a preferred strategy for economic development,
leading to renewed interest in federal or devolutionary political solutions,
especially in Africa and other parts of the developing world.
2. 1970-1990: Cautious Enthusiasm:
 o Many post-war federal experiments faced difficulties and were abandoned.
o Skepticism grew about the utility of federal solutions, especially in countries
lacking respect for constitutional law.
o Renewed internal tensions in classical federations like the United States,
Switzerland, Canada, and Australia reduced their attractiveness as models.
3. 1945-1970: Surge of Popularity:
o Post-war period saw a surge in federal solutions worldwide.
o Wartime success of established federations and colonial breakups led to a
proliferation of federal experiments.
o Europe's experience with ultra-nationalism during WWII contributed to a
revival of interest in federalism.
4. Prior to 1945:
o Federalism faced benign contempt in Europe and Britain, seen as an
incomplete form of government or a concession to political divisiveness.
o Some viewed federalism as outdated and unable to keep pace with modern
economic and political life.
5. Global Economic Forces:
o The recognition of an increasingly global economy has led to centrifugal
economic and political forces, weakening traditional nation-states and
strengthening international and local pressures.
o This trend, termed "glocalization" by Tom Courchene, has influenced people's
attitudes in favor of non-centralized political organization.
6. Technological Changes:
o Advances in technology have led to new models of industrial organization
with decentralized and flattened hierarchies, resembling federal structures.
o These developments have further encouraged support for non-centralized
political organization.
7. Political Developments:
o The resurgence of classical federations, despite previous difficulties,
demonstrated a degree of flexibility and adaptability in responding to changing
conditions.
o The collapse of totalitarian regimes in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet
Union undermined the appeal of transformative ideologies and highlighted the
drawbacks of authoritarian centralization.
o Progress in Europe's federal evolution, with initiatives like the Single
European Act and the Maastricht Treaty, also contributed to renewed interest
in federal solutions.
8. Differences from Previous Eras:
o The revival of interest in federal systems since the 1990s has been more
cautious compared to the post-1945 proliferation of federations.
o Federal systems are now being proposed as solutions for resolving civil ethno-
cultural conflicts in countries like Iraq, Sri Lanka, Sudan, and Cyprus.
9. Establishment of the Forum of Federations:
o Initiated by the Canadian federal government, the Forum of Federations
provides a platform for practitioners in federations to exchange information
and learn from each other's experiences.
o Major international conferences organized by the Forum focus on themes such
as social diversity, economic arrangements, intergovernmental relations, and
the welfare state in federations.
 o The Forum has evolved into a sustained initiative with multiple member
federations contributing to its activities and conferences held every three years
to facilitate discussions on federalism among practitioners and academics.

Recent innovations
1. Hybrid Structures:
o The post-Maastricht institutional structure of the European Union combines
features of both a confederation and a federation.
o Confederal features include intergovernmental decision-making in the Council
of Ministers and the role of national governments in implementing Union law.
o Federal features include the Commission's role in proposing legislation, the
use of qualified majorities for some legislation, and the supremacy of Union
law over national law.
o However, the lack of direct electoral and fiscal bases for federal institutions
has led to a perceived "democratic deficit" and undermined public support for
the EU.
2. Multi-level Federal Organization:
o There's a growing trend for federations to become constituent members of
wider federations or supra-national organizations.
o Germany has adjusted its internal federal relations to its EU membership,
influencing debates in other EU member states like Belgium, Spain, and
Austria.
o NAFTA's three member countries are federations, impacting their internal
federal-provincial relations, as seen in Canada.
3. Constitutional Asymmetry:
o Constitutional asymmetry, where member units have different relationships
with federations or supra-national organizations, is increasingly accepted to
facilitate political integration.
o Examples include Malaysia, India, Spain, and Belgium, as well as the EU's
move towards a Union of "variable speeds" and "variable geometry."
o Constitutional asymmetry introduces complexity and challenges but may be
necessary to accommodate varied regional pressures for autonomy.

These innovations reflect efforts to adapt federal principles to contemporary political and
economic realities, but they also present challenges in maintaining coherence and
effectiveness within multi-level governance structures.

Lessons from the experience of federations:

1. Combining Unity and Diversity:
o Federal systems offer a practical way to combine the benefits of unity and
diversity through representative institutions.
o Long-standing federations like the United States, Switzerland, Canada, and
Australia consistently rank high in quality of life indices.
2. Not a Panacea:
o Federations are not a cure-all for political challenges. Understanding the
potential pathologies of federal systems is crucial.
3. Importance of Constitutional Norms and Tolerance:
 o The effectiveness of a federal system depends on respecting constitutional
norms and fostering tolerance and compromise.
o Advocating federal solutions in hostile environments like Sri Lanka, Sudan,
and Iraq is futile without establishing necessary preconditions.
4. Need for Flexibility:
o The success of a federal system depends on its ability to adapt to the specific
demands and requirements of each society.
o There's no one-size-fits-all federal model, and variations in institutional design
are essential to accommodate diverse political realities.
5. Viability in Multi-ethnic or Multi-national Contexts:
o Despite challenges, federations in multi-ethnic or multi-national countries like
Switzerland, Canada, India, and Malaysia have demonstrated sustainability.
o Federal devolution can reduce tension by giving distinct groups a sense of
security through self-government, contributing to greater harmony and unity.
6. Universal Applicability:
o While federal systems may not be universally appropriate, they often offer the
most viable way to balance unity and diversity in many contemporary
contexts.
o Experience suggests that difficult-to-govern countries often adopt federal
political institutions, making the study of federal systems compelling and
essential.

Week 2 Readings:
Federalism in Nigeria: The Nigerian Experience in
Comparative Perspective by Rotimu Suberu
Introduction

1. Relative Success Amidst Challenges: Despite facing significant challenges,

Nigeria's federal system has been relatively successful in maintaining stability
compared to some other African countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo and
Sudan. This success is attributed to Nigeria's unique federal structure, which has
evolved since the civil war of 1967–1970 to become a 36-unit multiethnic federation.
2. Role of Federal Structure: Nigeria's federal system helps to transcend major ethnic
identities, promote inter-regional integration, and maintain inter-group equilibrium.
This structure has been instrumental in preventing large-scale internal disorder and
state disintegration, contributing to Nigeria's political resilience.
3. Corruption as a Barrier: Rampant political corruption within Nigeria's federal
system, particularly in the management of centrally collected oil revenues, poses a
significant barrier to the system's effectiveness. This corruption fuels local-level
antagonisms, strains national unity, and undermines socio-economic development.
4. Perception of National Unity: Surveys indicate substantial support among Nigerians
for the country's continued existence as a unified entity, despite tensions between the
predominantly Muslim north and Christian south. This contradicts external
observations of Nigeria as a fragile state on the brink of disintegration along ethnic or
religious lines.
 5. Comparative Analysis: The article offers a comparative analysis of federal
experiments in Africa, highlighting common factors contributing to the unpopularity,
fragility, instability, or failure of federalism on the continent. It evaluates Nigeria's
federal design in managing ethno-territorial conflicts, democratic politics, and
distributive or developmental issues.
6. Implications and Lessons: The Nigerian experience with federalism provides
valuable lessons for conflict management and governance of diversity elsewhere in
Africa and the developing world. However, the pervasive influence of political
corruption detracts from the potential value of Nigeria's federal model as a widely
applicable solution.

Federal Experiments in Africa: An Overview

1. Definition of Federalism: Federalism is characterized by the division of a polity into

territorial sub-units with constitutionally entrenched autonomy in certain policy-
making domains, along with representation within the overarching government. This
autonomy distinguishes federalism from decentralized unitary states and
confederations.
2. African Federal Experiments: Post-independence Africa has seen several attempts
at federal or quasi-federal systems, including in Cameroon, Zaire (now Democratic
Republic of Congo), Uganda, Kenya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Comoros, South
Africa, and Nigeria. Many of these experiments faced challenges and ultimately
failed.
3. Examples of Failed Federations: The Cameroonian federation ended in 1972, as did
the Congolese (Zaire) federation in 1965, both due to presidential decisions. Uganda's
federation lasted only four years (1962–1966) before being abolished by President
Milton Obote. Kenya's federalist constitution dissolved soon after independence.
4. Challenges to Sudanese Federalism: Sudan's federal experiment (1972–1983) aimed
to bring peace between the North and South but was undermined by central
government actions. Despite recent efforts, Sudan's federalism is seen as a
compromise leading towards secession rather than a permanent solution.
5. Ethiopian Federalism: Ethiopia's federalism has evolved through different
arrangements, including the federation with Eritrea and the subsequent ethnic
federation. The latter, established in 1995, aims to accommodate diverse ethno-
linguistic groups but operates more like a centralized unitary state in practice.
6. Unique Aspects of Nigerian Federalism: Nigeria stands out due to its civilian
political consensus supporting federalism and the adaptability of the federal model to
the country's ethnopolitical complexities. Despite challenges and contradictions,
Nigeria has maintained a robust federal system, albeit with issues of corruption and
political instability.

Redesigning Nigeria’s federal structure

1. Modes of Federation-building: Nigeria's federal structure has evolved from a

centrifugal federation to a more centripetal system, with a constitutionally hegemonic
central government. It has elements of both "coming together" and "holding together"
federations.
2. Historical Background: Nigeria's colonial history shaped its initial federal system,
which led to ethnic tensions and eventually civil war. Subsequent reforms, including
the creation of multiple states, aimed to promote national integration.
 3. Contemporary Challenges: Pressures for further decentralization have intensified,
especially since the return to civilian rule in 1999. Critics argue for a more
decentralized federation to address issues such as ethnic marginalization and resource
control, particularly in the oil-rich Niger Delta region.I
4. Federal Character Principle: Nigeria's federal design includes the federal character
principle, which aims to ensure equitable representation of ethnic groups in public
institutions. This principle extends to electoral processes, cabinet appointments, and
party compositions.
5. Centralization Concerns: Despite efforts to promote decentralization, Nigeria's
federal system still faces criticism for its centralization of power. This centralization
is evident in areas such as policing and control over natural resources, leading to calls
for greater state autonomy.
6. Proposed Reforms: Some critics advocate for a restructuring of Nigeria's federal
framework to create ethnoregional units, aiming to address historical imbalances and
promote greater autonomy. However, the feasibility and implications of such reforms
remain contentious.

Ethnic Conflict Management

1. Decentralization of Conflicts: Nigeria's multi-state federalism has decentralized and

compartmentalized ethnoreligious and regional conflicts, preventing them from
polarizing or destabilizing the entire federation. The subdivision of major ethnic
groups into multiple states has diluted hegemonic or secessionist tendencies.
2. Ethnic Minority Accommodation: The establishment of ethnically heterogeneous
states has promoted the political accommodation of ethnic minorities, enhancing their
representation and participation in governance. This has reduced feelings of
disenfranchisement and contributed to overall stability.
3. Cross-cutting State Boundaries: The division of Nigeria into multiethnic and sub-
ethnic states has moderated raw ethnic conflicts by creating states that are not strictly
based on ethnic lines. Intergovernmental relations have focused on functional and
jurisdictional issues rather than sectarian divisions.
4. Sharia Conflict Management: Nigeria's federal framework has effectively managed
the conflict over the extension of Islamic law in Muslim-majority states. The issue has
been framed as a matter of state autonomy rather than national imposition, and
variations in Sharia implementation between states have alleviated inter-religious
tensions.
5. Centralization Constraints: Despite the relative decentralization, Nigeria's federal
system has centralizing elements that constrain the implementation of Sharia law.
Constitutional guarantees of fundamental rights, unitary law enforcement agencies,
and financial dependence on the national revenue sharing system all limit the
autonomy of Sharia-implementing states.

Democratic Politics

1. Strengths of Federalism in Democracy:

o Nigeria's federal structure has facilitated inter-ethnic compromises and
bargaining within the party system.
o Decentralization pressures from the states have been instrumental in
promoting federal stability.
 o The Supreme Court has played an active role in arbitrating intergovernmental
conflicts, contributing to democratic resilience.
2. Drawbacks of Post-Military Civilian Politics:
o Electoral corruption and degradation have undermined the democratic process,
hindering Nigeria's democratic aspirations.
o Despite efforts to develop party institutions, military rule has stunted the
institutional growth of parties, leaving them susceptible to corruption and
internal conflicts.
3. Role of Power-sharing and Rotation:
o Power-sharing arrangements, such as the rotation of key positions among
ethnic and regional groups, have mitigated ethnic tensions and promoted
inclusivity.
o These arrangements have helped re-channel ethnic conflict within parties,
reducing the risk of inter-party strife.
4. Assertion of States' Rights:
o States have asserted their rights as a response to the hyper-centralization
fostered by military rule.
o Intergovernmental opposition politics between the federal government and
opposition-controlled states have challenged central authority and promoted
decentralization.
5. Challenges in Electoral Integrity:
o Electoral corruption has undermined the legitimacy of Nigerian democracy
and weakened its federalism.
o Weak party institutions, factionalism, and lack of internal democracy have
further eroded the electoral process.
6. Addressing Corruption and Electoral Integrity:
o Combatting endemic corruption requires institutional reforms to ensure the
political independence of electoral management bodies.
o Creating competitive electoral environments is essential for promoting fiscal
discipline, transparency, and good governance.

The Political Economy of Revenue Allocation

1. Current System Overview:

o Nigeria's revenue allocation system is highly centralized, with the federal
government collecting the majority of revenues, especially from oil and gas.
o Revenues are distributed vertically between the federal government, states,
and local governments, and horizontally among the sub-units, based on a
formula codified in national legislation.
2. Positive Aspects:
o The system is relatively simple and straightforward, reflecting Nigerians'
preference for transparency in revenue sharing.
o Centralized collection allows the federal government to play a crucial role in
macroeconomic stabilization and equalization among regions.
o Oil-producing states benefit from constitutionally guaranteed revenue shares
and mechanisms for accommodating their special needs.
3. Weaknesses and Challenges:
o The system promotes fiscal hegemony of the federal government, leading to
financial coercion and manipulation of sub-units.
 oOveremphasis on equal inter-unit shares and population in revenue
distribution fosters fiscal dependence, incompetence, and political corruption
at subnational levels.
o Socio-economic disparities persist, with regional inequalities remaining
among the worst globally.
o Fiscal dependence on oil rents undermines fiscal efficiency, political
accountability, and good governance, leading to monumental levels of
corruption and anti-developmental outcomes.
4. Implications and Consequences:
o Corruption and mismanagement of oil wealth exacerbate social frustrations,
political agitation, and violence, as seen in the Niger Delta insurgency.
o The absence of a mechanism for sub-federal governments to contribute to
macroeconomic stability further compounds economic inefficiency and
instability.
o Transitioning to a decentralized regime of subnational resource control or
market-preserving federalism could worsen imbalances between oil-rich and
other regions, potentially fueling further conflict.

Conclusion

The conclusions drawn from the analysis of Nigeria's federal system highlight both its
successes and challenges:

1. Resourceful Design: Nigeria stands out in Africa for its creative approach to
combining self-rule with shared government, despite facing imperfections and
tensions within its federal system.
2. Territorial Reconfiguration: Similar to India, Nigeria has adapted its internal
boundaries to manage ethnic conflicts effectively, leveraging the fluid nature of
African ethnic divisions to prevent domination by core regions or ethnicities.
3. Ethnically Inclusive Central Authority: Nigeria's federal institutions include
mechanisms to promote an ethnically inclusive central authority, fostering multiethnic
cabinets and reducing conflict-driven ethnic entrepreneurship.
4. Economic Governance Challenges: The revenue-sharing system in Nigeria has
decentralized corruption while exacerbating tensions between oil-rich and non-oil-
producing regions and the central government.
5. Redeeming Features: Despite its challenges, Nigeria's federal system centralizes
major taxation powers for national redistribution and stabilization while granting
subnational authorities access to centrally collected revenues.
6. Managing Diversity: The Nigerian federal system has provided a framework for
managing diversity rather than resolving it entirely, holding the country together
despite ongoing challenges.
7. Potential for Evolution: Similar to Canada and India, Nigeria's federal system has
the potential to evolve into a robust and stable model of multicultural democratic
federalism, especially if it transitions into a truly competitive electoral democracy.

In summary, while Nigeria's federal system faces significant hurdles, it also holds promise as
a model for successful federal governance in Africa and beyond, particularly if it continues to
evolve in a democratic direction.
De/Centralisation in Nigeria, 1954-2020 by Rotimi Suberu
Introduction: Background, brief literature review, and theoretical expectation

1. Roots of Centralization: The study acknowledges that while military rule and oil
revenues have been significant factors contributing to centralization in Nigeria, it
argues that centralization predates the era of military autocracy. It suggests that
Nigeria's unitary colonial foundations played a role in shaping centralization
tendencies within the federation.
2. Complex Intergovernmental Dynamics: Nigeria's diverse cultural landscape and the
presence of civilian political institutions have led to intricate intergovernmental
dynamics. These dynamics have influenced shifts in policies and institutional spheres
over time, challenging simplistic narratives that attribute centralization solely to
military rule or oil revenues.
3. Challenges to Prevailing Narratives: While some analyses portray Nigeria's
federalism as deteriorating under military rule, others argue that Nigerian states enjoy
significant autonomy. This perspective challenges the prevailing narrative of over-
centralization and suggests that Nigeria's federal system may exhibit characteristics of
decentralization in certain aspects.
4. Methodology: The study employs a systematic measurement approach to assess
de/centralization across various domains, including politico-institutional, policy, and
fiscal dimensions. It uses qualitative interpretation and analysis of indicators derived
from Nigerian constitutions, legislations, court rulings, and governmental data
sources.
5. Theoretical Expectations: The study anticipates finding a significant bias towards
both static and dynamic centralization in Nigeria. It expects that Nigeria's complex
historical, economic, and cultural context will influence the trajectory of
de/centralization over time, with factors such as colonial legacies, economic
dependencies, and cultural diversity playing crucial roles.
6. Comparative Context: The study draws on comparative literature to contextualize
Nigeria's experience within the broader framework of post-colonial federations. It
highlights the challenges faced by ethnically diverse countries in implementing
decentralized governance arrangements and emphasizes the importance of
understanding Nigeria's federal evolution within this comparative context.

By providing a detailed analysis of de/centralization in Nigeria, the study aims to contribute

to a more nuanced understanding of the country's federal dynamics and their implications for
governance and policy-making.

Static de/centralisation at the outset

The 'Nigeria (Constitution) Order in Council, 1954' marked a significant moment in Nigerian
federalism, ushering in a relatively decentralized era as Nigeria transitioned toward
independence in 1960. The 1954 Constitution aimed to accommodate rising sub-nationalisms
among Nigeria's diverse ethnicities while maintaining the unity of the colonial entity.

Key features of the 1954 Constitution included:

 • Creation of strong central authority alongside significant autonomy granted to the
Northern, Eastern, and Western Regions.
• Establishment of British Westminster-style executives, legislatures, judiciaries, and
public service commissions in the regions.
• Limited autonomy for regions to redesign their constitutional orders due to tight
constraints imposed by the federal constitution.
• Elected regional legislatures with centrally appointed colonial regional governors
dominating indigenous regional premiers.
• High level of democratic political decentralization evidenced by credible regional
electoral outcomes.

Regarding policy decentralization:

• Regions were empowered to make laws on matters other than those included in the
exclusive legislative list.
• Accommodation of regional interests even in exclusive federal subjects, such as
policing and external relations.
• Shared concurrent legislative powers in numerous policy fields, with varying degrees
of federal primacy and administrative control.

Residual subjects were assigned to the regions:

• Agriculture, pre-tertiary education, and other areas were predominantly under

regional control.
• Regional fiscal power included control over agricultural commodity marketing boards
and access to federally collected taxes on agricultural exports.
• Regional borrowing autonomy was recognized, allowing regions to make in-country
borrowing decisions.

At its inception, Nigeria's federation exhibited a blend of decentralist and centralist

tendencies. Decentralization was evident in the elevation of regional derivation as a
predominant principle of federal revenue sharing, concessions to regional autonomy, and
assignment of substantial legislative subjects to the regions. However, the regions were
creations of the federal center, and pressures to further subdivide them were resisted by the
British colonial government.

Overall, the 1954 Constitution laid the foundation for central dominance over time, despite
the initial decentralist features embedded in Nigeria's federal structure.

Overview of dynamic de/centralisation: Frequency, magnitude, direction, and

instruments

Frequency:

• Economic activity, elections, external affairs, and tertiary education experienced the
most frequent shifts in de/centralization, with each field undergoing between nine and
seven code changes.
• Agriculture, culture, pre-tertiary education, environmental protection, finance and
securities, law enforcement, media, restriction on own source revenues, and public
sector borrowing each witnessed between six and four code changes.
 • The fewest shifts, between one and three code changes, occurred in domains such as
national citizenship, employment relations, healthcare, language policy, social
welfare, transport, proportion of own source revenues, and proportion of federal
conditional transfers.
• Military rule and civil/military transitions often influenced these shifts, with
significant changes coinciding with regime transitions.

Direction:

• Legislative power became mildly more centralized during the First Republic (1961-
65) before experiencing more extensive centralization under military rule (1966–98).
• Following the restoration of civilian rule in 1999, legislative power became slightly
less centralized.
• A similar pattern is observed for policy administration, politico-institutional, and
fiscal values, with centralization peaking under military rule.

Instruments:

• Changes in Nigerian federalism involved constitutional means, legislation, and the use
of emergency powers.
• Military decree-laws, such as the Constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree
No. 1 of 1966, advanced centralization by granting sweeping powers to the Federal
Military Government.
• Emergency powers were used on a national scale, particularly during the Nigerian
civil war, to reorganize the federation and undermine secessionism.
• Military decrees were used to reorganize states, increasing their number from 12 to
36.
• Ouster clauses and the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty prevented judicial
review of intergovernmental relations.
• International treaties had limited impact on dynamic de/centralization, with the center
already enjoying broad powers under presidential constitutions.

Overall, changes in de/centralization in Nigeria were influenced by a combination of

constitutional means, legislation, emergency powers, military decrees, and limited impact
from international treaties. Military rule and civil/military transitions played a significant role
in shaping these changes, with periods of extensive centralization followed by some
decentralization following the restoration of civilian rule.

Forms of dynamic de/centralisation

Forms of dynamic de/centralization in Nigeria can be categorized into significant

centralization, mild centralization, stable de/centralization, and decentralization:

1. Significant Centralization:
o Policy and fiscal fields such as pre-tertiary education, agriculture, finance and
securities, employment relations, environmental protection, law enforcement,
public sector borrowing, and elections and voting experienced significant
centralization.
o Legislative authority in these fields predominantly resided with the federal
government, altering the historical regional autonomy seen in some areas.
 o Examples include federal control over agricultural grants, establishment of
federally owned secondary schools, centralization of finance and securities,
and exclusive federal regulation of law enforcement and elections.
2. Mild Centralization:
o Policy areas like external affairs, media, and culture experienced relatively
modest centralization.
o While central authority increased in these fields, states still maintained some
autonomy, such as in state broadcasting and television.
o Centralization in health care, transportation, and social welfare was also
moderate, with legislative or administrative shifts towards central authority.
3. Stable De/Centralization:
o Some areas, like currency and money supply, defense, and natural resources,
maintained stable de/centralization over time.
o Legislative and administrative authority remained largely unchanged in these
exclusive federal or concurrent fields.
o The level of state constitutional autonomy, federal conditional transfers, and
federal restrictions on state own-source revenues also exhibited stability.
4. Decentralization:
o Certain policy fields witnessed a tendency towards greater decentralization
over time, defying the overall centralizing trend.
o Examples include citizenship and immigration, tertiary education, language
policy, and institutional autonomy.
o Administrative decentralization in tertiary education, for instance, saw an
increase in the number of state-owned universities and polytechnics, while
language policy embraced multilingualism.

Explaining dynamic de/centralisation

1. Centralization Factors: The passage identifies several factors contributing to the

centralization of power in Nigeria's federal system:
o Historical Foundations: Nigeria's federal model was established top-down by
a dominant central authority, leading to inherently centralizing dynamics.
o Military Rule: Periods of military rule saw significant centralization efforts,
including the consolidation of power at the national level and the weakening
of state autonomy.
o Economic Underdevelopment: Nigeria's economic challenges, including
heavy reliance on natural resources like oil, have reinforced centralization
tendencies, with the central government gaining control over financial
resources.
o Ethnic Fractionalization: Nigeria's diverse ethnic landscape has both
promoted and challenged centralization, with various groups seeking
representation and autonomy within the federal structure.
o Democratization: While the transition to civilian rule has brought some
decentralizing measures, the tension between centralization and
decentralization persists, influenced by historical legacies and ongoing
political dynamics.
2. Military Role in Centralization: The military played a significant role in
centralization through:
 o Audacious Political Interventionism: Military interventions aimed to combat
ethnic divisiveness and corruption, resulting in the consolidation of central
authority.
o Constitutional Shifts: The military promoted a strong executive presidency
and introduced the principle of "federal character" to ensure ethnic and
religious representation, while also advancing centralization under the guise of
decentralization.
o Territorial Reorganizations: Military-led territorial restructuring weakened
regional opposition and enhanced central control, reinforcing centralization.
3. Economic Factors: Nigeria's economic reliance on oil revenues has bolstered
centralization by:
o Increased Fiscal Authority: Oil revenues expanded the central government's
fiscal powers, diminishing incentives for states to seek alternative revenue
sources or develop institutional capacity.
o Neglect of Agriculture: The focus on oil revenues led to the neglect of
agriculture, undermining regional economic bases and further consolidating
central control.
4. Ethnic Fractionalization and Decentralization: Nigeria's diverse ethnic landscape
presents challenges and opportunities for decentralization, with:
o Persistent Ethnic Tensions: Ethnic tensions and competition for resources
continue to shape political dynamics, complicating efforts to achieve
decentralization.
o Complex Identity Dynamics: Nigeria's multi-layered and fluid group
identities complicate the alignment of state boundaries with ethnic lines,
impacting decentralization efforts.
5. Civilian Period and Decentralization: Despite some decentralizing measures during
civilian rule, including Sharia extension and enhanced federal revenue transfers,
challenges remain due to:
o Constitutional Legacies: The entrenchment of centralizing legacies from
military rule and the absence of consensus on decentralization reforms hinder
radical decentralization efforts.
o Electoral Challenges: Fragility in electoral integrity poses additional
constraints on democratization and decentralization efforts.

Conclusion

The passage challenges the simplistic narrative of Nigeria's federal evolution as a binary
between decentralized pre-military rule and hyper-centralized military/post-military periods.
Instead, it emphasizes the nuanced dynamics of centralization and decentralization
throughout Nigeria's history:

1. Centralizing Elements from the Start: Nigeria's federal beginnings already

contained centralizing elements, inherited from late colonial and immediate post-
independence eras.
2. Military Rule and Centralization: While military rulers intensified centralization,
they did not completely dismantle the federal structure. They promoted
decentralization in some areas while reinforcing centralization in others.
3. Civilian Rule and Mitigation: The period of civilian rule from 1999 to 2020, under a
constitution sponsored by the military, mitigated some of the centralizing tendencies
of the military era.
 4. Less Dramatic Centralization: The centralization of Nigeria's federation over the
1954–2020 period was less dramatic than commonly portrayed in Nigerian
constitutional discourse.
5. Comparative Lessons: Nigeria's experience offers broader comparative lessons,
showing how unitary origins, autocracy, developmental ideology, and natural resource
dependence can influence centralization tendencies in federal systems.
6. Ethnic Diversity and Centralization: Nigeria illustrates how strong, territorially
concentrated ethnic diversities may promote federalism, but inherent fluidity and
fragmentation can lead to centralized and administrative federal designs.
7. Democracy and Federalism: While federalism and democracy are typically
intertwined, Nigeria demonstrates the possibility of non-democratic federal systems.
However, the flourishing of genuinely decentralized federal schemes often depends
on stable democratic constitutional rule.

Overall, the Nigerian experience underscores the complex interplay of historical, political,
economic, and social factors in shaping centralization and decentralization in federal systems,
offering valuable insights for comparative studies and the understanding of federalism in
diverse contexts.

Moving the State: The Politics of Democratic

Decentralisation in Kerala, South Africa, and Porto
Alerge by Patrick Heller
The politics of democratic decentralization in Kerala, South Africa, and Porto Alegre
involves the devolution of power and decision-making authority from central governments to
subnational levels, with a focus on enhancing citizen participation, local governance, and
accountability. Here's a key analysis of each case:

1. Kerala, India:
o Key Concepts: Kerala has been lauded for its successful implementation of
democratic decentralization through the institution of local self-government
bodies known as Panchayats. These Panchayats operate at the village, block,
and district levels and are responsible for local planning, development, and
service delivery.
o Analysis: Kerala's experience highlights the importance of grassroots
democracy and citizen engagement in decision-making processes. The state
has achieved remarkable success in social development indicators by
empowering local communities to address their own needs and priorities.
However, challenges remain, including issues of resource allocation, capacity
building at the local level, and ensuring equitable participation across diverse
socio-economic groups.
2. South Africa:
o Key Concepts: After the end of apartheid, South Africa embarked on a
process of democratic decentralization to address historical inequalities and
promote local democracy. This involved the establishment of municipalities as
the primary units of local government, with significant powers and
responsibilities devolved to them.
o Analysis: South Africa's experience with democratic decentralization reflects
the country's transition from authoritarian rule to democratic governance.
 Decentralization has aimed to promote inclusive development, improve
service delivery, and foster citizen participation. However, challenges such as
institutional capacity constraints, political fragmentation, and persistent socio-
economic disparities have hindered the effective implementation of
decentralization reforms.
3. Porto Alegre, Brazil:
o Key Concepts: Porto Alegre is renowned for its innovative participatory
budgeting process, which allows residents to directly participate in allocating a
portion of the municipal budget to community projects and priorities. This
grassroots initiative has been hailed as a model of democratic governance and
citizen empowerment.
o Analysis: Porto Alegre's experience demonstrates the transformative potential
of participatory democracy at the local level. By involving citizens in
decision-making processes and budget allocation, the city has enhanced
transparency, accountability, and social equity. Participatory budgeting has
also contributed to community mobilization, civic education, and the
strengthening of local governance structures. However, challenges persist,
including the need for continuous citizen engagement, ensuring
representativeness, and addressing power imbalances.

In summary, the politics of democratic decentralization in Kerala, South Africa, and Porto
Alegre illustrate the diverse approaches, challenges, and opportunities associated with
devolving power to the local level. These cases emphasize the importance of citizen
participation, institutional capacity building, and inclusive governance processes in realizing
the potential benefits of decentralization for democratic development and social
transformation.

Ethnic diversity and Federalism (Constitution making in

SA and Ethiopia) by Yonatan T. Fessha
Ethnic Diversity and Federalism in Constitutional Making: South Africa and Ethiopia

1. South Africa:
o Ethnic Diversity: South Africa is a diverse nation with a population
comprising various ethnic groups, including Black Africans (comprising
several ethnicities such as Zulu, Xhosa, and Sotho), White South Africans
(mainly of European descent), Coloureds (mixed-race ancestry), and
Indians/Asians.
o Federalism in Constitutional Making: During the constitutional making
process in South Africa, which culminated in the adoption of the current
Constitution in 1996, federalism was considered but ultimately rejected in
favor of a unitary system. This decision was influenced by the desire to
overcome the legacy of apartheid and promote national unity and integration.
2. Ethiopia:
o Ethnic Diversity: Ethiopia is known for its rich ethnic diversity, with over 80
ethnic groups, each with its own language, culture, and identity. The largest
ethnic groups include the Oromo, Amhara, Tigray, and Somali.
o Federalism in Constitutional Making: Ethiopia's current federal system was
established in the early 1990s following the overthrow of the Derg regime.
 The Constitution adopted in 1995 enshrines the principles of ethnic-based
federalism, aiming to accommodate the diverse ethnic identities and promote
self-governance at the regional level. The country is divided into nine
ethnically defined regional states and two self-governing cities.

Comparison:

• Approach to Diversity: While both South Africa and Ethiopia are ethnically diverse
countries, their approaches to managing diversity in constitutional making differed
significantly. South Africa opted for a unitary system to promote national unity and
reconciliation, whereas Ethiopia embraced ethnic federalism to accommodate diverse
identities and promote self-governance.
• Historical Context: The historical context played a crucial role in shaping the
decisions regarding federalism in each country. In South Africa, the legacy of
apartheid and the need to overcome racial divisions influenced the rejection of
federalism. In contrast, Ethiopia's history of centralization and authoritarian rule led to
the adoption of ethnic federalism as a means of addressing historical marginalization
and promoting inclusivity.
• Implementation Challenges: Both countries have faced challenges in implementing
their respective approaches to federalism. In South Africa, issues such as provincial
autonomy, resource allocation, and intergovernmental relations have posed challenges
to effective governance. In Ethiopia, concerns have been raised about ethnic tensions,
regional autonomy, and the balance between ethnic identity and national unity.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, South Africa and Ethiopia offer contrasting examples of how ethnic diversity
can be addressed in constitutional making and federalism. While South Africa chose a unitary
system to promote national unity, Ethiopia embraced ethnic federalism to accommodate
diverse identities and promote self-governance at the regional level. The experiences of both
countries highlight the complex interplay between ethnicity, governance, and constitutional
design in diverse societies.

Week 3 Readings:
Institutional complexity an unanticipated consequences:
the failure of decentralisation in South Africa by Thomas
A. Koelble & Andrew Siddle
Introduction

Decentralization was introduced to the South African constitution with the aim of promoting
democratic decision-making, citizen participation, and democratic legitimacy in the new
democratic dispensation. However, 16 years after its adoption, municipal governance in
South Africa is plagued by paralysis, service delivery failure, and dysfunction, leading to
widespread dissatisfaction among citizens and frequent service delivery protests.
Possible Explanations for the Crisis:

1. Lack of Funding: Some argue that a lack of funding, stemming from early
commitment to neo-liberal policies in the 1990s, lies at the heart of the crisis.
2. Institutional Capacity: Others suggest that a lack of institutional capacity within
municipalities is the root cause of the problem, indicating a deficiency in social
capital.
3. Centralist Bias of the Ruling ANC: There are viewpoints suggesting that the ruling
African National Congress (ANC) harbors a centralist bias, undermining
decentralization efforts.

Focus of the Study:

This study focuses on institutional design as an explanation for the current malaise in South
African local government. It suggests that the complexity of the system adopted, based on
international best-practice experience, does not align with the country's context. Instead, it
argues for the need for "good enough governance" rather than striving for "best practice."

Lessons from Other Contexts:

Studies of other countries, such as Italy, highlight that painstaking design does not always
ensure good performance. The absence of effective local institutions, accountable political
processes, local autonomy, and adequate resources can hinder the translation of institutional
design into effective governance.

Primary Argument:

The primary argument of this study is that the lack of a functioning civil service at the local
level is a primary reason for the failure of municipalities to fulfill their statutory and
constitutional obligations. It calls for a reassessment of the role of municipalities and
emphasizes the urgent need to equip them with technical, financial, and administrative
capacities for effective policy implementation.

Conclusion:

The absence of a functioning administrative and technical apparatus at the local level,
coupled with the proliferation of patronage opportunities, has contributed to the
dysfunctionality of South African municipalities. Addressing these challenges requires a
reevaluation of decentralization efforts and a concerted effort to build institutional capacity at
the local level.

Research methods and design

This study aimed to assess the extent to which South Africa applies the precepts of
decentralization, drawing on key analyses by scholars such as Putnam, Bardhan and
Mookerjee, Shah and Thompson, Grindle, and Falletti. The researchers developed a set of
dimensions to measure decentralization, reflecting requirements for effective local
government functioning.

Dimensions of Decentralization:
 1. Constitutional and Legal Basis: Municipalities must have a solid constitutional and
legal basis for existence and functioning, adequately provided for in South Africa's
constitution and legislative acts.
2. Defined Functions and Authority: Municipalities should have defined functions and
the legislative and executive authority to perform these functions.
3. Mechanisms and Systems: They must have rules, mechanisms, and systems to guide
their processes and a communication strategy to identify citizen demands.
4. Access to Resources: Municipalities need access to resources from their areas of
jurisdiction or other sources.
5. Accountability and Responsiveness: Municipalities should be accessible,
accountable, and responsive to their populations.

Research Findings:

The study reported findings on institutional capacity, public participation, communication

mechanisms, jurisdictional scope, legislative authority, revenue raising and sharing, and
financial management systems of municipalities. These dimensions were examined to
establish the extent to which municipalities comply with specific obligations and perform
powers and functions as provided by the constitution and legislation.

Sample Selection:

The study encompassed more than 50 municipalities, from which a sample of 37 was drawn
for specific analysis. Municipalities were selected from all nine provinces in South Africa and
categorized based on criteria from three classification spectrums: National Treasury's
capacity categorization, the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs'
vulnerability/performance spectrum, and the Municipal Infrastructure Investment
Framework.

Data Collection:

Data were obtained from archival public records and directly from municipalities. Archival
records included Annual Capacity Assessment Reports, summarized budgets, and Auditor-
General reports. Direct data collection involved discussions, interviews with officials,
councillors, and citizens, and examination of documentation kept by municipalities. The
process extended over five years, with a focus on the period from 2009 to 2010.

Conclusion:

The research process involved comprehensive data collection to assess various dimensions of
decentralization in South African municipalities, shedding light on their institutional capacity,
governance mechanisms, and compliance with legal requirements.

Institutional Capacity

Institutional capacity refers to municipalities' ability to perform tasks effectively, sustainably,

and efficiently. It includes administrative functions, service provision, responsiveness to
citizens, legislative authority, and accountability. However, in the South African context,
there are significant challenges related to institutional capacity.
 • Policy Framework: Only one municipality in the sample had established a policy
framework, indicating a lack of strategic planning.
• Staffing: Many municipalities reported inadequate staff establishment, high vacancy
rates, and reliance on acting positions, indicating a lack of skilled personnel.
• Performance Management Systems: Only two municipalities were fully compliant
with legislation regarding performance management systems. Lack of funding and
skills hindered implementation.
• Recruitment and Management: Municipalities showed minimal compliance with
legal requirements for recruitment, selection, and management of staff. Enforcement
of procedures was lacking.
• Cadre Deployment: Political considerations often influenced appointments, leading
to the prioritization of political reliability over skills.

Public Participation

Public participation mechanisms were lacking in most municipalities:

• Formal Mechanisms: Only 11 municipalities had formal mechanisms for public

participation, while ad hoc mechanisms operated elsewhere.
• Communication: Only 11 municipalities complied with informing and
communicating with the community about council decision-making.
• Websites: Compliance with website requirements for public dissemination of
information was extremely poor, with most municipalities lacking functional
websites.
• Ward Committees: While 22 municipalities had evidence of ward committees,
public perception of their effectiveness was low due to funding constraints and
geographical challenges.

Jurisdictional Scope

• Constitutional Mandates: Municipalities are authorized to perform various functions

mandated by the constitution, but there is significant variation in the number of
functions performed.
• Service Delivery: Many municipalities failed to provide essential services and were
unaware of their jurisdictional responsibilities.
• Stability: The number of functions performed varied significantly from year to year,
indicating instability in service provision.

Legislative Authority

• By-laws: Only a few municipalities had adopted by-laws, and many operated in a
legislative vacuum, affecting the legality of municipal activities.
• Council Authority: Municipal councils often neglected their authority to legislate,
leading to ineffective governance.

Revenue Raising

• Revenue Sources: Municipalities have the authority to raise revenue through various
sources, but compliance with statutory requirements was poor.
 • Tariff Policies: Many municipalities lacked tariff policies, credit control, and debt
collection policies, impacting revenue collection.
• Grant Dependency: Grant funding accounted for a significant portion of municipal
revenue, leading to accountability and responsibility challenges.

Conclusion

The institutional capacity of South African municipalities faces numerous challenges,

including staffing issues, inadequate performance management systems, poor public
participation mechanisms, legislative neglect, and grant dependency. These challenges hinder
effective governance and service delivery, highlighting the need for comprehensive reforms
to strengthen decentralization efforts.

Financial Management Challenges

The challenges facing local government in South Africa regarding financial management are
multifaceted and deeply entrenched:

• Capacity Issues: One of the primary issues contributing to financial mismanagement

is the lack of capacity and skills among financial personnel within municipalities.
This deficiency results in ineffective financial reporting, audit qualifications, and
inaccuracies in financial statements.
• Governance Concerns: Audit committees, tasked with overseeing financial practices
and risk management, often fail to fulfill their responsibilities adequately. They
neglect to identify and mitigate risks, review financial documents submitted for audit,
or play an active role in monitoring financial performance.
• Financial Practices: Municipalities exhibit poor financial discipline and internal
controls. Basic financial management processes such as authorization procedures,
reconciliations, and review of accounts are lacking. Additionally, there is a failure to
maintain supporting documents, produce timely financial statements, and implement
processes to prevent unauthorized expenditures.
• Unnecessary Expenditures: Municipalities frequently allocate funds to non-priority
items and activities, leading to wasteful spending. Examples include excessive
support for events such as music festivals, beauty pageants, and sporting events, as
well as unnecessary spending on public relations projects and luxury items like
expensive office accommodations and foreign travel by officials.

Audit Outcomes:

The audit opinions issued by the Auditor General provide insights into the extent of financial
mismanagement within municipalities:

• A significant proportion of municipalities receive unfavorable audit opinions,

including disclaimers, adverse opinions, and qualified opinions, indicating various
degrees of financial irregularities and non-compliance with auditing standards.
• Only a small minority of municipalities receive unqualified opinions, which signify a
clean bill of financial health. However, even among those, some may have additional
matters of concern highlighted in the audit report.

Root Causes of Failure:

Several underlying factors contribute to the failure of financial management in South African
municipalities:

• Ignored Accountability Mechanisms: Despite the existence of sophisticated

legislative frameworks and accountability mechanisms, such as audit committees and
oversight bodies, these structures are often overlooked or disregarded, allowing for
financial mismanagement and corruption to persist unchecked.
• Lack of Administrative Apparatus: The failure to establish a competent and
effective civil service at the local level undermines financial controls and governance.
Political considerations may have led to the appointment of politically connected
individuals lacking the necessary administrative skills and expertise.
• Political Considerations: The prioritization of political interests over administrative
competence may have compromised the effectiveness of local government structures.
Political affiliations and patronage networks often influence appointments and
decision-making processes, further exacerbating governance challenges.
• Increasing Regulation: In response to governance failures, the national government
may impose additional regulations on municipalities. However, this approach may
lead to technocratic overload and further hinder effective governance, particularly in
resource-constrained municipalities.
• Patronage Politics: Municipalities become centers of patronage for local politicians,
who use their positions to distribute resources and favors to their supporters. This
practice undermines the rationale for decentralization and perpetuates a cycle of
corruption and mismanagement.

Conclusion:

Addressing the systemic challenges facing financial management in South African

municipalities requires comprehensive reforms aimed at strengthening capacity, improving
governance structures, enhancing accountability mechanisms, and promoting transparency.
Without meaningful interventions, the developmental agenda of local government and the
broader aspirations of the country may continue to be undermined by systemic inefficiencies
and governance failures.

Decentralisation in Africa: Goals, dimensions, myths and

challenges by Paul Smoke
Introduction

Introduction to Decentralisation in Africa

Decentralisation is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that has garnered significant

attention globally, including in Africa. While many countries, including those in Africa, have
embraced decentralisation to varying degrees, there remain challenges and misconceptions
surrounding its implementation and effectiveness.

Key Themes in Decentralisation:

1. Goals of Decentralisation: Decentralisation initiatives typically aim to achieve

several primary goals, such as promoting local governance, enhancing service
 delivery, fostering economic development, and increasing political participation and
accountability.
2. Dimensions of Decentralisation: Decentralisation encompasses fiscal, institutional,
and political dimensions, which are often interconnected. These dimensions must be
considered holistically rather than in isolation to understand the complexities of
decentralisation fully.
3. Myths and Misconceptions: There are common misconceptions about
decentralisation, including ambiguity regarding its precise meaning, blurred
distinctions between deconcentration and devolution, and oversimplified views of its
outcomes and implications.
4. Challenges: Despite its potential benefits, decentralisation faces numerous challenges
in Africa, including varying interpretations and approaches, fragmented perspectives
among stakeholders, and the difficulty of striking a balance between local autonomy
and central oversight. Weakness lies in the technocratic nature. - technical exercise.

Conclusion:

Achieving successful decentralisation in Africa requires a nuanced understanding of its goals,

dimensions, and challenges. By addressing misconceptions and adopting integrated
approaches that consider multiple perspectives, policymakers and practitioners can enhance
the effectiveness of decentralisation initiatives and promote sustainable local governance and
development.

Common goals (potential advantages ) of decentralisation

Decentralisation offers a range of potential advantages, often centered around improved

efficiency, governance, equity, development, and poverty reduction. These goals are essential
for fostering sustainable local governance and addressing the diverse needs of communities
within a country. Here are some common advantages associated with decentralisation:

1. Improved Efficiency:

• Sub-national governments, being closer to the people, can better understand local
needs and allocate resources efficiently.
• Local governments have access to local information and context, enabling them to
tailor public services to meet the specific needs of their constituents.
• However, it's essential to consider that certain services may require centralized
provision for economies of scale or to address cross-jurisdictional issues.

2. Improved Governance:

• Decentralisation can empower citizens by allowing them to participate in decision-

making processes that directly affect their communities.
• Local governance can lead to decisions that are more aligned with the preferences and
needs of local populations.
• Governance issues, including accountability and citizen engagement, are critical
aspects that need attention for successful decentralisation efforts.

3. Improved Equity:
 • Local governments, familiar with local circumstances, can more effectively distribute
resources and target poverty within their jurisdictions.
• While local governments play a role in intra-area redistribution, central governments
are responsible for inter-jurisdictional redistribution to ensure equity across regions.
• Equitable distribution of resources and services is crucial for addressing disparities
and promoting social inclusion at the local level.

4. Improved Development and Poverty Reduction:

• Local governments contribute to local economic development by providing services,

fostering a conducive legal environment, and facilitating partnerships with key
stakeholders.
• Local economic development initiatives, when supported by local governments, can
contribute to poverty reduction and sustainable development.
• While local governments play a vital role, larger macroeconomic and institutional
conditions also influence local development outcomes.

Conclusion: Decentralisation holds the promise of enhancing efficiency, governance, equity,

and development outcomes at the local level. However, realizing these potential advantages
requires careful consideration of power dynamics, accountability mechanisms, and capacity-
building efforts to empower local governments effectively. By addressing these goals,
decentralisation initiatives can contribute to inclusive and sustainable development across
diverse communities.

Major dimensions of decentralisation and their linkages

Fundamental Dimensions of Decentralisation:

Decentralisation encompasses three fundamental dimensions—fiscal, institutional, and

political—that collectively influence its success in achieving various goals. Here's a brief
overview of each dimension and its significance:

1. Fiscal Decentralisation:

• Fiscal decentralisation involves the assignment of responsibilities and own-source

revenues to sub-national governments.
• It addresses resource disparities and provides local governments with the necessary
funds to deliver services effectively.
• Intergovernmental transfers play a crucial role in bridging fiscal gaps and supporting
local development initiatives.
• Poorly defined fiscal decentralisation can undermine the effectiveness of political and
institutional decentralisation efforts. (Determined by the sizes of these municipalities -
most of the residents are unemployed). (Makhanda municipality case study)
• The interaction between fiscal and political decentralisation is essential for
empowering local officials and fostering citizen engagement.
• Enough resources to run themselves, from national government. Raise their own
revenue (COJ taxes and revenues)

2. Institutional/Administrative Decentralisation:
 • Institutional decentralisation refers to the administrative bodies, systems, and
mechanisms at both local and intergovernmental levels.
• It includes structures that facilitate collaboration between formal government bodies
and other local stakeholders.
• Effective institutional arrangements are crucial for managing intergovernmental
relations and ensuring efficient service delivery.
• Adequate local capacity and organizational structures are necessary for sub-national
governments to fulfill their obligations.
• Institutional concerns are addressed in various articles, highlighting the importance of
well-designed structures and processes.

3. Political Decentralisation:

• Political decentralisation involves reforms that empower sub-national governments

and enhance local decision-making processes.
• It enables local governments to better understand and respond to the needs of their
constituents.
• A well-developed local political process is essential for ensuring accountability and
citizen participation in governance.
• Without adequate political reform, fiscal and institutional decentralisation may not
achieve their intended goals.
• Emphasizing accountability to local communities helps prevent local officials from
becoming solely accountable to themselves or local elites.

Conclusion: The success of decentralisation initiatives depends on the effective integration

of fiscal, institutional, and political dimensions. These dimensions are interconnected and
must be carefully considered in the design, implementation, and evaluation of
decentralisation policies. By addressing the linkages between these dimensions, policymakers
can enhance the prospects of achieving the desired goals of decentralisation, including
improved efficiency, governance, equity, and development outcomes.

Popular myths and misconceptions and decentralisation

1. Decentralisation as a Panacea or a Tragedy:

o Decentralisation is often viewed as either a universally beneficial solution to
public sector issues or as a detrimental force that undermines effective
governance.
o While decentralisation can offer advantages, such as improved efficiency and
governance, it can also pose challenges, like exacerbating interregional
disparities or fiscal irresponsibility.
o Negative outcomes associated with decentralisation are not inherent flaws but
result from poor design, inadequate procedures, or political immaturity.
2. Decentralisation Prerequisites:
o Some literature suggests that certain prerequisites, such as strong enabling
frameworks or local capacity, are necessary for successful decentralisation.
o However, these prerequisites may not be universally applicable, and their
absence should not preclude decentralisation efforts.
o Instead, these elements should be seen as essential components of a
comprehensive decentralisation strategy, with a focus on identifying existing
strengths and areas needing development.
 3. The Primacy of Political Will:
o Political will is often cited as the primary driver of successful decentralisation
initiatives.
o While political will is crucial, it alone is insufficient for achieving
decentralisation goals.
o Examples from various countries show that significant political will may lead
to constitutional or legal reforms supporting decentralisation, but progress may
still be limited due to complex institutional and political environments.
o Rushed or poorly planned reforms can overwhelm weak local governments,
undermine accountability, or create bureaucratic challenges for central
agencies.

Conclusion: Decentralisation is neither a cure-all nor inherently problematic. It can offer

benefits when properly designed and implemented but may also present challenges if not
carefully managed. Acknowledging the complexity of decentralisation and addressing
common myths and misconceptions is essential for developing effective decentralisation
strategies that align with specific country contexts and goals. By adopting a nuanced and
cautious approach, policymakers can maximize the potential benefits of decentralisation
while mitigating its potential pitfalls.

Key challenges for approaching decentralisation

1. Defining Decentralisation in Context:

o Decentralisation is a complex phenomenon that requires tailoring to the
specific political, institutional, fiscal, and cultural characteristics of each
country.
o Crafting a decentralisation system that balances genuine local autonomy with
justifiable central control is crucial.
o Considering the political context, including the nature of political parties and
civil society, is essential for determining feasible decentralisation approaches.
2. Coordinating Actors and Building Linkages:
o Decentralisation involves multiple actors, including various government
ministries, local governments, traditional authorities, NGOs, and international
agencies.
o Coordinating activities among these actors and building linkages between
different dimensions of decentralisation is challenging but necessary for
effective implementation.
o Mechanisms for coordination, such as decentralisation secretariats, may be
helpful but require careful management to ensure effectiveness.
3. Decentralisation Strategy:
o Developing a pragmatic implementation strategy is crucial for successful
decentralisation.
o Decentralisation is a gradual process that requires fundamental changes in
attitudes and behaviors among central and local officials as well as citizens.
o Prioritizing sectors, tasks, and revenues for decentralisation based on local
capacity and performance can enhance the likelihood of success.
o Providing information, education, and incentives for behavioral change is
essential for garnering support and ensuring accountability at both central and
local levels.
 o Differentiation among local governments based on capacity and performance
can incentivize improvement.
o Implementation strategy should be carefully considered and continuously
refined to address challenges and optimize outcomes.

Addressing these challenges requires a nuanced understanding of decentralisation dynamics

and a commitment to adaptive, context-specific approaches that prioritize collaboration,
capacity-building, and accountability at all levels of government and society.

Conclusion

The discussion on decentralisation highlights its potential benefits, including improved

efficiency, governance, equity, development, and poverty reduction. However, several myths
and challenges need to be addressed for successful implementation.

Myths such as viewing decentralisation as a panacea or tragedy, emphasizing prerequisites,

and overestimating the primacy of political will need to be dispelled. Instead, a pragmatic
approach should be taken, considering the specific context of each country and gradually
implementing decentralisation while addressing fiscal, institutional, and political dimensions.

Key challenges include defining decentralisation within each country's context, coordinating
multiple actors involved, and developing a coherent implementation strategy. Sequencing
decentralisation to incorporate various dimensions simultaneously, starting with modest
funding and technical assistance, and gradually increasing autonomy based on performance
are recommended strategies.

Overall, effective decentralisation requires a nuanced understanding of the context, careful

coordination among actors, and a pragmatic, incremental implementation strategy tailored to
each country's needs.

Indigent lists - lack of following up and consolidating information efficiently.

No one is monitoring the municipalities - accountable to political parties.

Elite capture = chieftaincies

Week 4 Readings
Federalism and Decentralisation in Sub-Saharan Africa:
Five Patterns of Evolution by Jan Erk
Abstract
This study examines the trajectory of decentralization and federalism in Sub-Saharan Africa
since the 1990s, emphasizing the discrepancy between the intended reforms and their actual
implementation. It proposes five benchmarks to track the evolution of decentralization and
federalism in the region.

Introduction
The introduction provides an overview of decentralization and federalism as governance
frameworks and highlights the gap between the envisioned reforms and their realization in
Sub-Saharan Africa. It introduces the five benchmarks proposed to map the evolution of
decentralisation.

Conceptual Distinctions
This section clarifies the definitions of federalism and decentralization, distinguishing
between constituent entities with autonomous powers and the devolution of powers without
constitutional protection. It discusses how these distinctions blur in Sub-Saharan Africa due
to top-down creation of new entities alongside reforms.

Promises and realities of decentralisation

Here, the study explores the international promotion of decentralization despite limited
empirical evidence supporting its effectiveness. It also considers the role of structural factors
in determining decentralization outcomes and examines challenges faced by established
federations like Canada and Switzerland.

Five Benchmarks
1. Symmetrical Recentralization: The study discusses the phenomenon of recentralization
despite decentralization reforms, noting a reversion to nation-wide politics and a focus on
national goals in infrastructural projects. Administrative deficiencies and patronage networks
contribute to recentralisation.

2. Differentiated Performance: This section delves into the variations in governing

capacities among regions, resulting in differential outcomes of decentralisation. It explores
how wealth disparities affect the benefits derived from decentralization and how informal
networks influence resource distribution among regions.

3. Legitimising Traditional Authority: The resurgence of traditional authority structures

and customary law is examined here, along with the coexistence of modern and customary
law, often to the exclusion of traditional institutions. The section also addresses the post-
colonial rejection of legal pluralism contributing to the exclusion of traditional institutions.

4. Politicizing Local Conflicts: This part of the study investigates the politicization of local
conflicts over resources, leading to heightened tensions and violent confrontations. It
explores the complex interplay between decentralization and resource management at the
local level.
5. Federal Extinction: The study examines short-lived or unsuccessful decentralization
efforts in Sub-Saharan Africa, highlighting the challenges in reconciling unity and diversity
through formal institutional arrangements. It emphasizes the need for nuanced evaluations of
decentralization outcomes beyond mere survival

Conclusion
In conclusion, the study underscores decentralization and federalism as mechanisms to
manage, rather than solve, societal divisions. It emphasizes the importance of understanding
local context in shaping decentralization outcomes and advocates for prudence and realistic
expectations in governance reform efforts.

Local Governance in Africa: The challenges

of democratic decentralisation by Dele
Olowu and James S. Wunsch
Chapter 2; The Historical Context
The authors provide a deep dive into efforts to create local self-governing organs in African
countries since colonial times. Through this they shed light on the various emphases and
priorities of African local governance over the last half century, delving in the background
and consequences. They conclude by mentioning how African countries adopted polices that
had the potential to create viable and effect local self governing structures. They further
mention that this contrasts with previous decentralisation efforts, which typically favoured de
concentrated structures erroneously labelled as “local governments”. The adoption of policies
focusing on authentic self-governance, signifies a crucial change in the public-policy
paradigm regarding decentralisation in many countries. In essence, it reveals a departure from
previous approaches that did not prioritise true local autonomy and governance.

Authors highlight the influence of colonial legacies on present-day administrative structures.

The authors discuss how colonial powers imposed centralized administrative systems in
Africa, often with little regard for existing local governance traditions. For example, in
British colonies like Nigeria and Kenya, indirect rule was implemented, where traditional
leaders were co-opted into the colonial administration to govern local communities on behalf
of the colonial authorities. This system marginalized indigenous governance structures and
laid the groundwork for centralized governance after independence.

The chapter also examines the impact of post-independence efforts to reform local
governance in Africa. The authors discuss how newly independent African states attempted
to decentralize power and strengthen local governance institutions to promote development
and democratization. However, these efforts were often hindered by political instability,
bureaucratic inertia, and resistance from central governments reluctant to relinquish control.
For instance, in countries like Ghana and Tanzania, decentralization initiatives faced
challenges due to the entrenched power of ruling elites and the legacy of authoritarian rule.
In Chapter 2 of "Local Governance in Africa" by Dele Olowu and James S. Wunsch, the
authors discuss the four phases of local government development in Africa and their
corresponding characteristics:

1. Colonial Period (Phase 1): During this phase, local governance systems were
primarily designed to serve the interests of colonial powers. Local authorities were
often appointed by colonial administrators and were used as instruments for
implementing colonial policies and extracting resources from local communities. The
focus was on maintaining control and exploiting local resources rather than promoting
local development or citizen participation.
2. Independence and Nation-Building (Phase 2): Following independence, many
African countries embarked on nation-building efforts aimed at consolidating state
power and promoting national unity. Local governance structures were often
centralized and bureaucratic, with limited autonomy for local authorities. The
emphasis was on state-led development and modernization, with local governments
playing a subordinate role in implementing national policies.
3. Decentralization Reforms (Phase 3): In response to challenges such as state
inefficiency, corruption, and lack of accountability, many African countries initiated
decentralization reforms during the late 20th and early 21st centuries. These reforms
aimed to devolve power from central governments to local authorities, enhance citizen
participation, and improve service delivery at the local level. However,
decentralization processes varied widely across countries, with some implementing
deconcentration (centralization of administrative functions) rather than genuine
decentralization.
4. Current Trends and Challenges (Phase 4): The authors highlight the diverse trends
and challenges facing local governance in Africa in the current phase. While
decentralization reforms have led to some progress in terms of citizen participation
and local development, they have also faced implementation challenges such as
limited financial resources, bureaucratic resistance, and political interference.
Moreover, issues such as corruption, ethnic politics, and social inequalities continue
to pose significant obstacles to effective local governance in many African countries.

Overall, the authors argue that understanding the historical evolution of local governance in
Africa and the various phases it has undergone is crucial for analyzing the current state of
local government structures and identifying strategies for addressing existing challenges and
promoting inclusive and responsive governance on the continent.

Chapter 3; New Dimensions in African Decentralisation

Chapter 3 of "Local Governance in Africa" by Dele Olowu and James S. Wunsch delves into
the contemporary dynamics of local governance in Africa, focusing on the challenges and
opportunities facing local government structures in the region. The authors examine the
various factors influencing the functioning of local governance institutions, including
political, economic, social, and administrative dynamics.

The chapter's main focus is the contribution of political decentralisation to local citizen
involvement and democracy. The authors talk about how decentralisation measures, which
transfer authority from national to local governments, can improve governance by making it
more inclusive, accountable, and responsive. For example, constitutional revisions in South
Africa and Uganda have boosted citizen participation in decision-making processes and
introduced systems for local government elections.

The authors also examine how economic variables affect African local governance. They talk
about how fiscal decentralisation can enable local governments to better serve their
communities and address development priorities at the local level by giving them more
financial resources and revenue-raising authority.

Nevertheless, they also draw attention to issues that restrict the independence and efficacy of
local governance institutions, such as financial limitations, insufficient ability to generate
revenue, and reliance on transfers from the federal government. The writers also examine
how social dynamics influence the results of local governance in Africa. They look at issues
of community involvement, ethnic diversity, and social cohesion, highlighting the
significance of creating inclusive and representative local governance institutions that take
into account the diversity of the local populace. For instance, initiatives to support ethnic
reconciliation and community-based decision-making have aided in the localization of
peacekeeping and social cohesion in nations like Rwanda and Burundi. The writers also cover
the administrative issues that African local governance institutions face, such as capacity
limitations, ineffective bureaucracy, and corruption.

They highlight the need for institutional reforms, capacity-building initiatives, and anti-
corruption measures to strengthen local government administration and enhance service
delivery. For instance, in countries like Ghana and Senegal, initiatives such as
decentralization training programs and e-governance platforms have been implemented to
improve administrative efficiency and accountability at the local level.
SECTION B
Week 5 Readings
Democracy. Participatory Politics and
Development: Some Comparative Lessons
from Brazil, India and South Africa by
Patrick Heller
Abstract
This article suggests that when addressing inclusive democratic development in the global
south, we should focus on citizens' ability to effectively utilize their political and civic rights.
It emphasizes the need to analyze participatory aspects of democracy, particularly
decentralized participatory governance, and examines the political and institutional
conditions that support it. The reading reviews research on participatory governance projects
in Brazil, India (Kerala), and South Africa, drawing comparative lessons that underscore the
interaction between political parties and civil society.

Introduction
Heller's article delves into the complexities of inclusive democratic development in the global
south, emphasizing the importance of effective citizenship and participatory governance.
Drawing on comparative literature on European welfare states, Heller notes the correlation
between working class mobilization, welfare state size, and socio-economic justice. However,
he points out that the classic patterns of working class formation are absent in the global
south due to unfavorable conditions of capitalist development and fragmented working class
politics. Despite transitions to electoral democracies, pervasive inequalities persist, limiting
the effective representativeness of democratic institutions and hindering the formation of
effective welfare states.

• Welfare state defined.

welfare state is a form of government in which the state (or a well-established

network of social institutions) protects and promotes the economic and social
well-being of its citizens, based upon the principles of equal opportunity,

The concept of effective citizenship becomes critical to comprehending the challenges of

democratisation in the global south. Heller contends that, while formal representative
institutions may exist, there is frequently a disconnect between legal rights and the practical
ability to exercise those rights. This gap, referred to as effective citizenship, emphasises the
importance of focusing on citizen formation rather than classes. Civil society plays an
important role in shaping associational talents, but widespread inequities skew the playing
field, resulting in de facto exclusion from political life.
 • Associational talents

"Associational talents" refers to individuals' or groups' abilities to form and engage in

associations or organizations for collective action and participation in civic or
political activities. It encompasses skills such as organizing events, mobilizing people,
advocating for causes, and collaborating with others towards common goals within
the framework of civil society. These talents are crucial for fostering social cohesion,
promoting democratic participation, and driving societal change through collective
action.

Heller sees participation as a critical component of effective citizenship, emphasising

participatory politics as a way to challenge elite-dominated systems of democracy. He uses
three examples—South Africa's local government involvement, Kerala's decentralised
planning campaign, and Brazil's participatory budgeting—to demonstrate efforts to promote
decentralised participatory governance. These initiatives, led by states, parties, and civil
society, seek to increase citizen participation in governing processes. Through a comparative
examination, Heller draws insights on the conditions under which participatory politics might
thrive and highlights the need of continual fights to enhance democracy.

The Institutions and Politics of DPG

The debate over improving democratic accountability at the local government level centres
on the conflict between those calling for "good institutions" and those emphasising
participation. Institutionalists think that with the correct incentives and carefully planned
procedures, local bureaucrats may effectively drive development while public participation is
confined to consultation. Participantistas, on the other hand, say that more binding forms of
citizen engagement are fundamentally valuable since they mobilise societal resources that
benefit development. This distinction reflects broader divides in the democracy debate
between theories emphasising election institutions and those emphasising participation and
deliberation. However, both viewpoints fall short of offering a complete picture of the local
democratic state.

Institutionalists ignore the impact of societal power dynamics on institutional efficacy,

believing that well-built institutions will function regardless of social realities. Participatistas,
on the other hand, believe that communities have natural associational capacities, ignoring
the necessity for institutional frameworks to encourage participation and convert inputs into
outputs. The conflict between these viewpoints, expressed in the power dynamic between
governmental actors and civil society, impacts debates and policies concerning
decentralisation initiatives.

Examining experiences of decentralised participatory governance (DPG) in South Africa,

Brazil, and Kerala reveals that state capability and political configurations play critical roles.
South Africa's strong inherited state capacity has fostered institutional development, but its
dominant party system has hampered participatory politics. Despite institutional hurdles,
Brazil and Kerala have experienced successful participatory interfaces, owing to competitive
electoral arenas and left-wing parties' involvement with civil society. The divergent paths of
DPG emphasise the difficulties and contradictions between institutional and participative
perspectives. While South Africa excels in institutional development, participation remains
underdeveloped, whereas Kerala and Brazil, despite institutional challenges, have established
successful participatory interfaces. This emphasises the necessity of understanding the
interaction between state capacity, political structures, and participative dynamic structures to
foster inclusive governance.

The Political Origins of DPG

Heller's study offers a detailed critique of the institutionalist and participatista approaches to
democratising local governance. He recognises the institutionalists' emphasis on creating
effective structures and incentives inside local bureaucracies to promote development,
emphasising the value of rule-based procedures and expert knowledge. However, he contends
that institutionalists frequently underestimate the impact of societal power dynamics on
institutional performance. Heller gives instances, such as the potential for institutions to be
seized by elites or to nurture clientelism, especially in early democracies with limited
associational skills.

Heller, on the other hand, criticises participatistas for assuming that communities have
associational potential by default, ignoring the function of institutional design in fostering
citizen engagement. He thinks that, while participatory initiatives are beneficial, they must be
backed by strong institutional structures in order to translate public ideas into concrete
results. Heller's point is highlighted by the difficulties encountered in South Africa, where
participatory mechanisms formed after apartheid have been hollowed out as a result of the
ANC government's emphasis on centralization and managerialism. Despite initial efforts to
encourage involvement, citizen influence in municipal governance has declined.

Furthermore, Heller notes successful examples of participatory governance in Kerala and

Brazil, led by left-leaning parties and thriving civil societies. In these situations, participatory
reforms like Kerala's "People's Campaign for Decentralised Planning" and Brazil's
participatory budgeting programmes have empowered citizens and promoted inclusive
development. These examples show how effective democratic government necessitates a
balance of institutional design and participatory dynamics. Thus, Heller advocates for a
holistic strategy that recognises the relevance of both institutional frameworks and citizen
engagement in promoting effective democratic practices at the local level.

The Impact of DPG

Heller's research of participatory governance in Brazil and Kerala emphasises the
transformative power of decentralised planning processes for local democracy. He draws
comparisons between participatory budgeting (PB) in Brazil and the Kerala People's
Campaign for Decentralised Planning, emphasising the programmes' shared characteristics
and distinct outcomes. In Brazil, particularly in Porto Alegre, participatory budgeting has
become a paradigm of community engagement in municipal budgets. Despite variances in
execution, PB often entails popular assemblies and elected delegates setting local budgets.
Heller's research, along with others, shows that participatory budgeting has democratised
local governance and revitalised civic society.

Heller observed that PB cities had more associational activity and citizen engagement than
non-PB cities, indicating a shift away from clientelistic ties and towards direct citizen
involvement in decision-making processes. Even when PB was criticised for being essentially
consultative, it increased transparency and public oversight of local governance.
Similarly, the Kerala People's Campaign empowers residents through layered participatory
exercises at the community level. Citizens actively participate in gramme sabhas, task forces,
and development planning since decision-making powers have been delegated significantly.
The Campaign's institutional architecture ensures meaningful community participation, with
gramme sabhas setting priorities that are translated into Panchayat-approved budgeted
initiatives. Notably, the Campaign has promoted inclusive engagement, with significant
participation from marginalised groups such as Dalits and women.

Furthermore, it has broadened political society by mobilising volunteers and empowering

elected officials, as well as encouraging civic organisations and self-help groups.

While there are complaints of the Campaign's bureaucratic processes, the overall influence on
civil society participation and democratisation is clear. Heller's analysis highlights how
participatory governance projects in Brazil and Kerala have reinvented local democracy by
decentralising decision-making, encouraging inclusive involvement, and empowering
marginalised communities, ultimately strengthening the democratic fabric of these areas.

The Politics of DPG

Heller's analysis dives into the divergent outcomes of participatory democracy in Brazil,
Kerala, and South Africa, despite comparable decentralising policies and participatory
politics driving these programmes. He blames the failure of participatory democracy in South
Africa on the African National Congress' (ANC) hegemonic rule, which reduced civil
society's engagement in decision-making processes. While the legislative framework and
institutional capacities were supportive to participatory government, the ANC's hold on
power enabled it to co-opt participatory structures, bringing them under party control or
replacing them with technocratic decision-making systems.

In contrast, Brazil and Kerala successfully implemented participatory democracy in the face
of political crises and threats to conventional power structures. Participatory budgeting
evolved in Brazil as an alternative to clientelistic politics, fighting oligarchical party
dominance.

Similarly, the Kerala People's Campaign sought to eliminate patronage networks and involve
citizens in decision-making processes. Instead of focusing only on development objectives,
both movements saw institutional transformation as a means of mobilising civil society and
encouraging citizen participation in governance.

Heller emphasises the significance of conducive political conditions for participatory

democracy to thrive. He finds three critical components: reformist groups within the state,
autonomous civil societies, and programmatic left-of-center political parties coordinating
political reforms. These alignments, while difficult to obtain, promote participatory
government by bridging state-society divides and encouraging collaboration between officials
and civil society players.

Furthermore, Heller recognises the differences within each scenario, emphasising the
importance of existing civil society strength and political mobilisation in shaping the success
of participatory efforts. In both Brazil and Kerala, the strength of civil society organisations
determined the extent of democratic reform. The flexibility of participation emphasises its
reliance on political possibilities and social movement dynamics, underlining the complex
interplay between institutional changes and civil society capacities.

The Possibilities of Participatory Governance

Heller's analysis tackles objections to decentralised involvement, refuting the concept that
poor communities lack the capacity for interaction and that excessive participation can cause
disturbance. He disputes this institutionalist viewpoint by claiming that participatory
democracy's normative assumption challenges the concept of citizen incapacity, using real-
world examples to demonstrate citizens' ability to alter local governance when given the
opportunity. Heller recognises issues such as preference formation and coordination, but
emphasises the need for inventive institutional design and ongoing fine-tuning to solve them.
Using examples from Brazil, Kerala, Bolivia, Ecuador, and South Africa, he emphasises the
importance of context sensitivity in decentralisation policies.

Finally, Heller calls for a more nuanced definition of participatory democracy, emphasising
the ability of ordinary persons to participate in decision-making processes and the
significance of specialised institutional methods to create meaningful citizen engagement.

Conclusion: Bringing Civil Society In

In Europe, getting the working class in was the key to reconciling capitalism with social
justice; in the global south, bringing civil society in could be the key. Representative
democracy on the global periphery has shown to be a poor tool for directly achieving
redistributive advantages. If nominal democracy has been established, genuine democracy
remains a distant objective. However, formal democracy has in some circumstances created
opportunities for civil society organisations. When civil societies self-organize and acquire
access to the political sphere, citizen formation strengthens and effective pressure for
redistributive policies increases. In the situations discussed here, the process of strengthening
democracy has taken the form of implementing DPG.

DPG is a massive reform initiative, but it has achieved unexpected traction in a variety of
situations throughout the global south. On the one hand, it entails devolving considerable
resources downwards, which by definition constitutes a significant rescaling of public power
organisation. On the other hand, elaborate institutional arrangements are required to prevent
local elite capture while yet providing authentic and effective ways of interaction for
subordinate groups. Despite these hurdles, both Brazil and Kerala have made tremendous
strides in implementing DPG. Even if the redistributive impacts of these reforms are limited,
simply opening up new avenues for public participation is a crucial step towards reducing the
gap between nominal representation and actual results.However, the case of South Africa
serves as a reminder that simply establishing proper institutions is insufficient. The ultimate
success of DPG is dependent on getting the politics right, specifically achieving a good
balance between political authority and civil society.
Week 6 Readings
The Political Economy of Decentralisation
Reforms: Implications for Aid Effectiveness
by Kent Eaton
Abstract
The article "Applied Political Economy of Decentralization: An Overview" presents a
comprehensive analysis of the challenges and complexities surrounding decentralization
reforms in developing countries. It argues that despite being a significant focus of
development support, decentralization often fails to achieve its intended objectives, such as
efficient service delivery, democratic reform, and poverty reduction, due to the mismatch
between official policy goals and the motivations of political and bureaucratic actors. This
misalignment is exacerbated by the heterogeneous nature of central governments pursuing
decentralization, where the goals and behaviors of various actors vary considerably.
Moreover, the influence of development partners on decentralization reforms adds another
layer of complexity, as their incentives may not always align with those of government
actors, leading to potential conflicts and inconsistencies in reform outcomes. The article
highlights the need for a deeper understanding of the political economy dynamics driving
decentralization reforms, advocating for a framework that guides development partners in
analyzing these dynamics. Key elements to consider include the initial context and
motivations for reform, the actors involved, the stage of reform, and the role of external
development partners. By integrating political economy analysis into decentralization support
activities, the article suggests that development partners can better design interventions that
lead to sustainable reform outcomes aligned with development objectives.

Initial Context and Motivation: The article delineates various contexts driving
decentralization reforms, ranging from responses to political or economic crises to efforts to
strengthen state legitimacy or transition from authoritarian to democratic rule. Understanding
the initial conditions under which decentralization arises is crucial for assessing the genuine
reasons for pursuing it, its implications, and potential durability.

Key Actors and Incentives: It emphasizes the importance of considering the incentives
facing elected politicians and national-level bureaucrats in driving or constraining
decentralization reforms. Political motivations, institutional power consolidation, career
trajectories, and agency rivalry all heavily influence the shape and pace of decentralization.

Shifting Reform Dynamics: The article highlights that decentralization is a process

influenced by shifting dynamics, where conflicting incentives of different actors affect reform
trajectories. These dynamics manifest in the initial design stage through legal frameworks
and continue into the implementation phase, impacting resource allocation and bureaucratic
struggles.
Roles and Incentives of Development Partners: It examines the roles and incentives of
development partners in promoting decentralization. While development partners play a
significant role in supporting decentralization, their varying incentives and fragmented
behavior can complicate reform efforts. Development partners need to carefully consider the
political and institutional context of reform in each country to provide effective support.

Operational Implications: The article outlines operational implications, advocating for a

more thorough consideration of the political and institutional dynamics underlying
decentralization. It acknowledges challenges in conducting robust political economy analysis
but argues that such analysis is essential for informing pragmatic and sustainable approaches
to decentralization support.

Introduction
The article delves into the multifaceted nature of decentralization, highlighting its political
and institutional underpinnings as key drivers and shapers of the reform process. Despite
lofty normative goals often cited by politicians and officials, decentralization is deeply
entrenched in politics, reflecting struggles between and within government entities over
power, authority, and resource allocation. This political reality persists across various forms,
targets, generality, and transformation types of decentralization. While recognizing the
complexity and diversity of decentralization dynamics, the article underscores the need for
development partners to move beyond treating it as a purely technical exercise and to engage
more deeply with its political dimensions. It argues for a pragmatic approach that
acknowledges the inherent political nature of decentralization and offers a framework for
understanding the political economy factors influencing reform trajectories. By focusing on
political and bureaucratic incentives, development partners can better navigate the reform
landscape, identify windows of opportunity, and adapt their approaches to support sustainable
decentralization outcomes. The article calls for a shift away from simplistic notions of
"political will" and towards a nuanced understanding of the incentives shaping actors'
behaviors and decisions. Additionally, it acknowledges the influence of structural factors on
decentralization processes and advocates for a flexible and pragmatic approach that accounts
for evolving political and economic conditions. Through a political economy lens,
development partners can better tailor their support to align with the complex realities of
decentralization in diverse country contexts.

Outlining a framework
Eaton's analysis emphasizes the multifaceted nature of decentralization, starting with the
diverse contexts driving initial reforms. For instance, crises in countries like the Philippines
and Indonesia prompt drastic decentralization measures, while decentralization in Bolivia and
Colombia aims to bolster state legitimacy and address post-conflict challenges. These diverse
motivations underscore the importance of understanding the historical, institutional, and
cultural contexts shaping reform trajectories. Moreover, Eaton highlights the pivotal role of
incentives for key actors like elected politicians and national-level bureaucrats. Examples
abound, such as electoral motivations driving politicians to pursue or resist decentralization,
while bureaucrats seek to consolidate power or advance their careers through reform efforts.
This intricate interplay of incentives influences reform trajectories, where adjustments are
made in response to changing political and economic conditions, as seen in countries
transitioning from authoritarian to democratic rule. Eaton also delves into the complex
dynamics involving development partners, citing instances of fragmented donor behavior and
varying objectives within the international development community. These examples
illustrate the need for coherence and collaboration among donors to effectively support
decentralization initiatives and address overarching questions about its desirability and
efficacy.

Understanding Political Incentives and Behaviour

1. Electoral Incentives:

• Argument: Electoral dynamics, especially prevalent in democracies, significantly

influence decentralization outcomes. Subnational elections can empower local
officials to advocate for decentralization, while national politicians may manipulate
these elections to consolidate power.
• Example: In Mexico and Brazil, declining legitimacy of governing parties in the
1980s led to state-level electoral victories for opposition parties, paving the way for
decentralization demands.

2. Partisan Incentives:

• Argument: Internal party structures determine support for decentralization, with

legislators beholden to subnational officials more likely to endorse it.
• Example: In Latin American countries, legislators controlled by subnational party
leaders are more supportive of decentralization compared to those influenced by
national party leaders.

3. Institutional Incentives:

• Argument: National authorities face strong pressures to defend central institutions,

leading to cautious approaches to decentralization. Sequencing administrative, fiscal,
and political decentralization shapes autonomy levels for subnational governments.
• Example: In Bolivia and Colombia, party dynamics influenced decentralization
trajectories, with bold approaches endorsed when subnational positions offered
promising electoral prospects.

4. Coalitional Incentives:

• Argument: Informal institutions like clientelism influence politicians' attitudes

towards decentralization, posing challenges to established power dynamics.
• Example: In the Philippines, single-member districts in the House of Representatives
gave legislators an interest in slowing down the decentralization process due to
concerns about losing personal control over resource allocation.

1. Labor Unions and Decentralization:

• Argument: Labor unions, often centralized in structure, are generally skeptical of

decentralization due to concerns about losing influence and bargaining power at the
national level. This skepticism leads them to resist changes that reduce the authority
of the national government.
 • Example: In Thailand and the Philippines, teachers' and public sector unions opposed
decentralization efforts in education, preventing the transfer of authority from the
central to local governments.

1. Business Associations and Decentralization:

• Argument: Business associations may support decentralization as it can weaken labor

unions' national-level bargaining power, potentially benefiting the private sector.
Additionally, decentralization of taxation and regulation can create competition
among subnational governments, which businesses can leverage for regional
investment deals.
• Example: In countries like Chile, Argentina, and Mexico, pro-market business
associations favored decentralization to counterbalance labor influence and limit state
intervention in the economy.

1. Ethnic Cleavages and Decentralization:

• Argument: In ethnically divided societies, politicians weigh decentralization based

on its impact on interethnic coalitions, aiming to either mitigate or exacerbate ethnic
tensions. Decentralization can either facilitate peacebuilding efforts or exacerbate
conflicts depending on the context.
• Example: In the Democratic Republic of Congo, decentralization measures were
introduced as part of post-conflict negotiations to address ethnic tensions and stabilize
the country after a civil war.

1. Customary Authorities and Decentralization:

• Argument: Customary authorities wield significant influence over local affairs in

many developing countries and often form coalitions with national incumbents. Their
interaction with subnational governments can shape the decentralization process.
• Example: In countries where political parties are weak, national governments may
prioritize recognizing the authority of customary leaders over elected local
governments, impacting the decentralization process.

Understanding Bureaucratic Incentives and Behaviour

Labor Unions and Business Associations

Labor Union Preferences:

• Centralization Bias: Labor unions, such as teachers' unions in Thailand, often resist
decentralization efforts due to concerns about losing collective leverage and authority.
In centralized systems, unions wield significant power over national decision-making
processes and fear that decentralization might dilute their influence.
o Example: Teachers' unions in Thailand strongly opposed the transfer of
teachers to local governments during the country's education decentralization
efforts, fearing a loss of control and bargaining power at the national level.

Impact on Policymaking:
 • Influence on Policy Design: Labor unions have historically influenced policymaking
by resisting decentralization measures that could weaken their authority or disrupt
established power structures. Their opposition can hinder the smooth implementation
of decentralization reforms.
o Example: In the Philippines, public sector unions successfully lobbied against
the devolution of education services under the 1991 Local Government Code,
citing concerns about job security and working conditions.

Political Dynamics:

• Coalition Dynamics: Decentralization decisions are often influenced by political

coalitions seeking to either weaken or consolidate labor union power. In some cases,
decentralization may be promoted by political leaders to undermine the influence of
national unions and strengthen local governance.
o Example: Augusto Pinochet's support for decentralization in Chile was partly
motivated by a desire to weaken the national public sector unions, which
posed a threat to his regime's authority.

Business Association Preferences:

• Decentralization Support: Business associations may support decentralization

initiatives as a means to counterbalance labor power and exploit competition among
subnational governments for investment opportunities. Decentralization can create a
more favorable environment for business interests by reducing regulatory burdens and
facilitating local economic development.
o Example: Pro-market business associations in various countries may endorse
decentralization policies to limit the influence of statist economic policies at
the national level and promote a more business-friendly environment.

Concerns and Opposition:

• Capacity and Fiscal Concerns: Despite potential benefits, business associations may
oppose decentralization if they perceive it as leading to fiscal irresponsibility,
inadequate local government capacity, or insufficient provision of essential
infrastructure. Concerns about potential disruptions to business operations or
investment climates may also drive opposition.
o Example: Business associations in certain countries may express concerns
about the fiscal autonomy of local governments, fearing that decentralized
decision-making could result in fiscal profligacy or inefficient resource
allocation, ultimately hindering economic growth and investment
opportunities.

Development Partner Considerations:

• Assessment of Union and Business Views: Development partners should carefully

assess the perspectives of labor unions and business associations on decentralization
to understand the political landscape and anticipate potential challenges or
opportunities. Understanding the underlying motivations and concerns of these
stakeholders is essential for crafting effective decentralization strategies.
 o Example: Development partners conducting political analyses in target
countries should evaluate the degree of centralization within labor unions and
assess their likely responses to proposed decentralization reforms. Similarly,
understanding business associations' priorities and concerns can inform the
design of decentralization policies that balance economic objectives with
governance considerations.

Challenges of coordination: Mechanisms and Realities

Informal or Ad Hoc Mechanisms in Decentralization

China's Approach:

o Ad Hoc Coordination: In China, significant decentralization occurs without

formal policy framing. Central government ministries engage in ad hoc
coordination with subnational governments during routine operations, without
formalized coordination mechanisms.
▪ Example: Regular interactions between central government ministries
and subnational governments occur as part of routine operations, with
limited formal coordination.

Vietnam's Experience:

o Management Through Existing Institutions: Decentralization in Vietnam is

managed through existing institutions, with central government ministries like
Finance, Planning, and Investment, along with their provincial counterparts,
playing a key role in managing decentralization efforts.
▪ Example: Various central government ministries in Vietnam manage
decentralization without formal coordination, relying on existing
institutional structures.

Philippines' Interagency Oversight:

o Establishment of Oversight Committee: The Philippines established an

interagency oversight committee to monitor the implementation of the Local
Government Code. However, real power remains fragmented among
individual agencies, leading to challenges in cohesive coordination.
▪ Example: Despite the establishment of the oversight committee,
individual agencies retain significant autonomy, which can hinder
effective coordination of decentralization efforts.

South Africa's Intergovernmental Mechanisms:

o Promotion of Intergovernmental Relations: South Africa established

intergovernmental mechanisms, including sector-specific Intergovernmental
Relations Committees and the President’s Coordinating Council, to improve
intergovernmental coordination.
▪ Example: While these mechanisms promote intergovernmental
relations, they may lack sufficient authority and focus primarily on
 consultation rather than enforcement, posing challenges for effective
coordination.

Formal Coordination Mechanisms

Single Department Coordination:

o Empowering a Single Department: Some countries empower a single central

government department to coordinate decentralization reforms. However, this
approach faces challenges due to competition among ministries and unclear
mandates.
▪ Example: Kenya's Ministry of Local Government is tasked with
coordinating decentralization efforts but faces legitimacy issues and
lacks control over finance and sectoral ministries.

Interdepartmental Bodies:

o Formal Interdepartmental Oversight: Establishing formal interdepartmental

bodies to oversee intergovernmental fiscal reforms is another approach.
However, these bodies often struggle with internal conflicts and lack strong
enforcement powers.
▪ Example: Interdepartmental mechanisms in Cambodia and Indonesia
have faced challenges due to single-agency leadership and insufficient
enforcement powers.

Independent Coordination Bodies:

o Appointment of Independent Bodies: Some countries appoint substantially

independent bodies to coordinate local government reform activities, aiming to
enhance neutrality and effectiveness.
▪ Example: India's State Finance Commissions and Uganda's Local
Government Finance Commission are examples of independent bodies
overseeing decentralization activities.

Development Partner Coordination:

o Efforts for Donor Coordination: Development partners have attempted to

coordinate decentralization support, often through joint committees or
working groups. However, effectiveness varies depending on structure and
incentives.
▪ Example: Donor coordination mechanisms in Indonesia, such as the
Decentralization Support Facility, aim to improve cooperation but face
challenges due to conflicting institutional incentives.

Conclusion:

o Importance of Effective Coordination: Effective coordination mechanisms

are crucial for successful decentralization. Understanding the dynamics of
informal and formal coordination, as well as the incentives of stakeholders, is
essential for designing and implementing coherent decentralization strategies.
Understanding the Dynamism of Context and Incentives
1. Unintended Consequences:
o Eaton highlights how decentralization efforts can lead to unintended outcomes
due to the complex interplay of political, bureaucratic, and societal factors. For
example, decentralization in Chile initially aimed to maintain fiscal stability
but inadvertently empowered mayors and municipal governments, leading to
further decentralizing measures over time.
o The case of Bolivia's Law of Popular Participation demonstrates how
decentralization can generate unforeseen political challenges, such as the
emergence of new political parties like the Movement Toward Socialism
(MAS), which gained significant influence at both local and national levels.
2. Where You Sit Is Where You Stand:
o Eaton argues that the stance of political actors on decentralization is
influenced by their institutional positions and future ambitions. Politicians and
bureaucrats may change their positions on decentralization based on their
evolving roles within the political and bureaucratic systems.
o Examples include the shifts in decentralization support by the Sandinistas in
Nicaragua and the African National Congress in South Africa, which changed
their stances on decentralization based on their positions in government and
evolving political dynamics.
3. Pressures to Modify Initial Frameworks:
o Eaton discusses how the initial frameworks of decentralization may need to be
revisited and modified over time due to changing circumstances and emerging
evidence. For instance, in Uganda, concerns about weak service delivery and
problematic resource use led to a revision of the fiscal decentralization
strategy in 2002, resulting in restrictions on local government autonomy.
o Similarly, in Indonesia, issues with substandard local financial management
prompted partially recentralizing legislation in 2005, indicating a need to
adapt decentralisation frameworks in response to new challenges.

Applied Political Economy of Decentralisation diagnostics

1. Integration with PEDCA: The Political Economy of Decentralization Context
Analysis (PEDCA) serves as the foundational framework upon which the Political
Economy of Decentralization Issue Analysis (PEDIA) is built. While PEDCA
provides a broad understanding of decentralization dynamics within a given context,
PEDIA zooms in on specific issues within that framework, ensuring that targeted
analyses are grounded in comprehensive contextual insights.
2. Relevance to Specific Initiatives: PEDIA becomes particularly pertinent when
development partner programs seek to align their support with either government-
driven priorities or those identified by development partners themselves. By focusing
on specific decentralization initiatives, PEDIA facilitates a more tailored approach to
intervention, ensuring that resources are directed towards areas with the highest
potential for impact and sustainability.
3. Clear Framing of Reform Objectives: One of the primary objectives of PEDIA is to
delineate and articulate reform objectives clearly. By doing so, PEDIA enables
stakeholders to understand the rationale behind proposed reforms and assess their
alignment with prevailing political and bureaucratic dynamics. This clarity not only
 enhances the feasibility of implementation but also fosters dialogue and consensus-
building among stakeholders.
4. Role in Informing Engagement: PEDIA serves as a catalyst for dialogue and
collaboration among development partners, government counterparts, and civil
society stakeholders. Through a systematic analysis of political economy incentives
and stakeholder interests, PEDIA identifies strategic entry points for engagement and
sheds light on alternative reform measures that may be more politically feasible.
5. Components of PEDIA: The comprehensive nature of PEDIA is reflected in its key
components, including:
o An introductory statement contextualizing the issue under consideration.
o Articulation of how the issue relates to broader development objectives.
o Description of the methodological approach employed in the analysis.
o Stakeholder analysis, encompassing main actors and institutional arenas.
o Discussion of interdependencies with other issues, drawing on insights from
previous PEDCA analyses.
o Summary of implications for development partners, guiding strategic decision-
making.
6. Review and Dissemination: PEDIA undergoes a rigorous vetting process to ensure
its credibility and acceptability among stakeholders. Feedback gathered through
workshops and consultations helps refine the analysis, while broad dissemination
strategies ensure widespread awareness and engagement beyond traditional channels.
7. Implications for Donor Engagement: PEDIA provides valuable insights into the
alignment of donor engagement with government priorities, the feasibility of
proposed reforms, and the identification of strategic intervention areas. By integrating
these insights into donor strategies, development partners can optimize their support
for decentralization initiatives and enhance their overall effectiveness.
8. Case Studies: Real-world examples from Uganda, Indonesia, and Kenya illustrate the
tangible impact of political economy analysis on decentralization efforts. These case
studies highlight the consequences of overlooking political dynamics and underscore
the importance of informed decision-making in guiding development interventions.

In essence, PEDIA represents a critical tool for navigating the complex landscape of
decentralization, ensuring that interventions are evidence-based, contextually relevant, and
conducive to sustainable development outcomes. By integrating political economy analysis
into their strategies, development partners can enhance the effectiveness and impact of their
support for decentralization initiatives.

The passage highlights the importance of transitioning from Political Economy of

Decentralization (PED) analysis to concrete operational interventions. It emphasizes the need
to identify feasible actions based on political economy insights rather than mechanically
assessing intervention viability.

1. Spectrum of Entry Points: Fritz, Kaiser, and Levy (2009) present a spectrum of
generic entry points informed by political economy insights, ranging from feasible
actions in the present to those requiring changes in underlying conditions. The focus
is on identifying reform space and opportunities, such as through coalition building,
rather than solely assessing intervention viability.
2. Actionable Implications of PED Analysis: A typology is adopted to delineate
actionable implications of PED analysis in decentralization, both in the present and
future contexts. This framework aims to systematically guide the transition from
 analysis to operational interventions, providing a structured approach to harness
future examples and strengthen the PED framework.
3. Feasibility Assessment: PED analysis entails assessing the feasibility of technical
proposals. While some desired reforms may not be immediately feasible, the intent is
to encourage innovation and nurture reforms over time by either designing feasible
measures or changing underlying conditions.
4. Case Examples: Case examples from Peru and the Philippines illustrate scenarios
where certain decentralization reforms face resistance or limitations due to political
environments. Instead of pursuing infeasible reforms, emphasis is placed on
promoting feasible measures or preparing for future opportunities.
5. Creativity in Engagement: Development partners are encouraged to think creatively
about engaging in feasible actions rather than pushing for unrealistic reforms. For
instance, technical budgeting reforms could be linked to local service provision to
incentivize their adoption by local governments.
6. Future Opportunities: PED analysis identifies future opportunities for devolution or
decentralization, emphasizing sustained efforts to strengthen local capacity and
anticipate political shifts that may open windows of opportunity.
7. Policy Implications and Dynamics: Understanding emerging actors and dynamics is
crucial for anticipating decentralization trajectories. Development partners need to
support reform trajectories that build toward promising outcomes and address gaps in
decentralization reforms.
8. Challenges and Considerations: Development partners must confront challenges in
decentralization support, including conflicting organizational objectives and the need
for better coordination. The volume advocates for a broader-based and more careful
analysis to inform decisions about engaging in decentralization reform.
9. Learning and Progress: The passage concludes by acknowledging the need for
ongoing learning-by-doing at the country level to enhance the effectiveness of
decentralization support. It emphasizes the importance of flexible frameworks and
pragmatic analysis to inform informed decision-making and strengthen
decentralization efforts.

In summary, Eaton underscores the importance of leveraging political economy insights to

identify feasible actions and navigate the complexities of decentralization reform effectively.
It emphasizes the need for creativity, flexibility, and ongoing learning to support meaningful
progress in decentralization initiatives.

Provinces a bulwarks: centrifugal forces

within the ANC by Doreen Atkinson
Abstract
This paper examines the evolution of provincial government in South Africa since the
constitutional compromise of 1994 between the ANC and National Party. It highlights how
the constitutional provision for an 'equitable share' of fiscal resources to provinces has led to
patronage relationships and weakened incentives for effective financial management at the
provincial level. Legislative oversight of provincial spending is also portrayed as relatively
weak due to the influence of ANC structures acting as a 'shadow government'. Furthermore,
the paper suggests that provincial ANC elites have become influential in national politics,
often acting as king-makers. It notes a lack of interest in expanding provincial powers or
policy-making discretion. The provincialism observed in South Africa is attributed to fiscal
flows and political interests rather than federalist ideology, leading to a centrifugal dynamic.
However, the paper acknowledges the existence of increasingly effective administrative
oversight mechanisms within key agencies such as the presidency and the Public Service
Commission.

Introduction
This article examines the evolution of provincial government in South Africa since the
constitutional compromise of 1994. Despite the constitutional provision for meaningful
provincial roles and functions, the ANC provinces have not lobbied for increased powers.
The lack of a federal mindset and ideology of provincialism is apparent, yet provinces remain
politically influential entities.

The article highlights two contradictory threads: poor governmental performance at the
provincial level and increased political influence of provincial elites. While provinces
struggle with weak governance, financial mismanagement, and corruption, provincial elites
have gained control over state resources, leveraging the 'equitable share' provision in the
Constitution. They have become king-makers at the national level, focusing on resource
control and appointments rather than expanding provincial powers.

The constitutional compromise of 1994 introduced a form of regional devolution, influenced

by the NP's advocacy for federalism and the ANC's centralist tradition. However, the
provinces' ambitions to expand their powers faded as they faced administrative complexities
and patronage opportunities.

The rush for jobs in the provinces after 1994 led to the creation of a new 'bureaucratic
bourgeoisie', primarily concerned with personal prosperity and upward social mobility.
Patronage networks and cadre deployment practices further entrenched personalistic
governance, contributing to financial mismanagement and corruption.

Despite some improvements in reporting and accounting, many provincial departments lack
the political will to address these issues, perpetuating weak governance operations. The
guaranteed funding flow to provinces, known as the 'equitable share', has enabled financial
mismanagement and patronage practices to persist unchecked.

In conclusion, the article underscores the intertwined nature of poor governance, patronage
politics, and personalistic governance in South Africa's provincial governments, challenging
the initial vision of meaningful provincial roles outlined in the 1994 constitutional
compromise.

1. Patronage Networks in Rural Provinces:

o Homeland Bureaucracies Integration: The absorption of homeland
bureaucracies into the new provincial order intensified patronage networks,
particularly in rural provinces. Traditional African social networks,
characterized by vertical structures, further reinforced these patronage risks.
o Role of Traditional Leaders: Traditional leaders, serving as political brokers,
wield significant influence, especially in rural areas. They leverage their
 position to secure resources for their followers, thereby entrenching their own
power and that of the ANC provincial elites.
o State Resource Distribution: Government agencies often distribute state
resources to local leaders to secure their loyalty. This includes projects,
contracts, and job opportunities, which are distributed to traditional leaders
and their followers, sometimes at the expense of institutional performance.
2. Patronage Networks in Urban Provinces:
o Development in Urban Areas: Patronage networks also thrive in urban
provinces, albeit with different dynamics. Urban elites, including business
figures, prioritize efficiency, growth, and profit maximization. Their
relationship with provincial governments is influenced by factors such as
customary expectations, traditional networks, and access to resources.
o Shift in ANC Membership: Economically developed provinces like Gauteng
and Western Cape are experiencing a decline in ANC membership, signaling a
shift in the relationship between urban elites and the dominant party. In
contrast, rural provinces show strong growth in ANC membership, indicating
the enduring influence of the party in these areas.
o Alignment with Patronage Networks: Provincial elites, regardless of the
province's urban or rural character, seek to maintain control over provincial
resources. They often align themselves with patronage networks to secure
their positions within the ANC and protect their power bases.
3. Challenges to Governance and Oversight:
o Weak Executive Oversight: Provincial legislatures, dominated by the ANC,
often lack effective oversight over provincial executives. This weak oversight
allows for administrative bloat and hinders accountability mechanisms.
o Influence of Patronage Networks: Patronage networks undermine provincial
legislatures' ability to hold decision-makers accountable. The real power
dynamics often operate outside official institutions, making government
activities opaque and accountability difficult to enforce.
o Centrifugal Dynamics: The relationships between national, provincial, and
municipal governments remain unclear, leading to centrifugal dynamics.
Political interventions, such as the imposition of premiers by the national
ANC, highlight the power struggles between different levels of government
and party structures.

Overall, the pervasive influence of patronage networks, coupled with weak governance
structures and oversight mechanisms, poses significant challenges to effective governance
and state-building efforts in South Africa's provinces.

The developmental state and its application in South

Africa:
1. Gap between theory and reality: The author acknowledges the theoretical
framework of the developmental state, characterized by a small, capable bureaucratic
elite insulated from external pressures, with clear economic objectives. However, the
author observes that South Africa falls short of this ideal due to factors such as
political patronage, lack of highly trained bureaucracy, and unclear economic
objectives.
 2. Administrative capacity building: Despite the challenges, the author notes that some
government agencies, particularly at the national and provincial levels, exhibit
elements of Weberian bureaucracy. These agencies are gradually improving their
capacity for program design, implementation, and monitoring, indicating a shift
towards more professional and technocratic governance.
3. Role of civil society and media: The author highlights the role of civil society
organizations, the public protector, and the media in holding government officials
accountable and exposing corruption. These actors serve as watchdogs and contribute
to maintaining a level of administrative propriety.
4. Political dynamics: The author discusses the complex political landscape in South
Africa, characterized by competing factions within the ruling party, power struggles at
provincial levels, and the rise of provincial elites. Despite these challenges, the author
suggests that the ship of state continues to sail, albeit with structural strains, and
pockets of administrative efficiency remain resilient.
5. Consequences of institutional dynamics: The author identifies unintended
consequences of institutional features within the ANC, such as the reliance on a
reliable revenue stream and the strengthening of provincial political bases. These
dynamics contribute to a focus on capturing and holding onto power rather than
pursuing ideological or developmental goals.

Week 9 Readings
African Decentralisation: Local Actors,
Powers and Accountability by Jesse C.
Ribot
Defining Decentralisation
“…. is any act in which a central government formally cedes powers to actors and
institutions at lower levels in a political-administrative and territorial hierarchy (Mawhood
1983; Smith 1985).”

Decentralization encompasses various forms and concepts, each with its own implications
and objectives:

1. Political or Democratic Decentralization: This involves transferring powers and

resources to local authorities that are representative of and accountable to the local
population. The aim is to increase public participation in decision-making processes
and improve the responsiveness of governance to local needs and aspirations.

Autocratic regimes use decentralisation to advance their objectives.

Think of the South African context and the power assumed by local councillors.
 1. Deconcentration or Administrative Decentralization: This form entails transferring
power to local branches of the central state, such as administrative bodies or local
technical agents. These local units remain upwardly accountable to the central
government and primarily serve its interests.
2. Fiscal Decentralization: Involves the decentralization of fiscal resources and
revenue-generating powers. While fiscal transfers are important, they are often
considered as part of both deconcentration and political decentralization rather than a
separate category.
3. Devolution: While often used interchangeably with decentralization, devolution
specifically refers to the transfer of powers from the central government to non-
central government bodies, including local elected governments, NGOs, customary
authorities, and private entities.
4. Delegation: This occurs when public functions are transferred to lower levels of
government, public corporations, or other authorities outside the regular political-
administrative structure to implement programs on behalf of a government agency.
5. Privatisation: Unlike decentralization, privatization involves the permanent transfer
of powers to non-state entities, such as individuals, corporations, or NGOs. It operates
on an exclusive logic rather than the inclusive public logic of decentralisation.

Summary
Ribot’s reading focuses on the evolution of decentralization reforms in African governments,
particularly focusing on the recent shift towards emphasizing democratization, pluralism, and
rights. While decentralization aims to strengthen both central and local governance to support
national objectives, the reading primarily examines local government and institutions as key
recipients of decentralized powers.

The underlying logic of decentralization is that local institutions are better positioned to
discern and respond to local needs and aspirations, leading to greater equity and efficiency.
However, there is limited research assessing whether such conditions exist or lead to desired
outcomes. Many reforms initiated in the name of decentralization may not deliver the
presumed benefits and could undermine efforts to create sustainable and inclusive rural
institutions.

The author argues that decentralization reforms often lack clarity and may not entrust
downwardly accountable local authorities with sufficient powers. Many reforms may retain
central control rather than genuinely transferring power to local levels. As a result, the
decentralization experiment has made timid progress, with many reforms existing more in
discourse than in practice.

The review highlights the need for decentralization reforms to entrust downwardly
accountable representative actors with significant domains of autonomous discretionary
power. It suggests that the current decentralization efforts in Africa vary in terms of legal
reform, scale of local government, types of local authorities engaged, mix of powers
devolved, and motives of governments. However, the author emphasizes the importance of
assessing these decentralization efforts to identify those that genuinely empower local
authorities and lead to positive outcomes.

Introduction
The introduction delineates the prevalence of decentralization reforms across African nations,
underscored by explicit support in constitutions for local governance and a shift towards
emphasizing democratization and rights. It defines decentralization as the formal ceding of
powers from central to lower levels of governance, aiming to strengthen local institutions for
better service provision and democratic governance. While decentralization has been
promoted as part of neoliberal agendas, the review focuses on enhancing local governance
rather than diminishing central authority. It asserts the underlying logic that local institutions,
being closer to the populace, can better discern and respond to local needs, fostering equity
and efficiency. However, confusion often arises regarding what constitutes decentralization,
and many reforms may not yield intended benefits. The review aims to dissect design and
implementation challenges, offering insights into policy research and analysis to ensure
decentralization reforms entrust local authorities with meaningful autonomy and power,
ultimately leading to desired outcomes.

Decentralisation in African History

Decentralization in Africa has a rich historical backdrop, marked by various waves of reform
initiatives. For instance, in francophone West Africa, decentralization occurred in distinct
phases following significant events like the World Wars and independence. Weinstein (1972)
highlights how certain francophone Central African nations also underwent decentralization
either just before or after gaining independence. These historical shifts were deeply
influenced by colonial legacies, where systems like "association" and "indirect rule" were
introduced by colonial powers to manage rural populations for administrative purposes rather
than to empower local communities. These systems, although once praised for their
participatory nature, were later criticized for perpetuating institutional segregation, with
Africans governed under customary law distinct from civil laws applied to Europeans.
Mamdani (1996) notes how colonial policies aimed at differentiation led to the creation of
separate, "native" institutions to govern subjects, reinforcing the dominance of central
authority.

After gaining independence, African governments inherited and largely perpetuated these
centralized governance structures. Therkildsen (1993) points out that local governments
became tools of administrative control, with ruling groups seeking to maintain authority over
local affairs. Despite promises of autonomy, local institutions were often sidelined, and major
functions like healthcare and education were centralized. For instance, in Kenya,
decentralization efforts in the 1960s and 1970s reduced the significance of local government,
reflecting a broader trend towards centralization. Similarly, Ghana and Nigeria implemented
decentralization reforms in the 1970s and 1980s, yet these initiatives were often characterized
by growing central government control rather than genuine devolution of power to local
authorities. Even in cases where democratic decentralization was written into constitutions, as
in Ghana and Nigeria, reforms frequently fell short of empowering local institutions,
perpetuating a cycle of centralization.

The late 20th century saw a renewed interest in decentralization, driven in part by structural
adjustment programs and democratization efforts. However, despite the rhetoric of
democratic decentralization, reforms often failed to translate into meaningful empowerment
of local governments. Donor agencies and scholars increasingly advocated for democratic
decentralization, emphasizing the need for autonomous and accountable local institutions.
Nevertheless, Oyugi (2000) notes that centralizing tendencies persisted, rendering genuine
political decentralization elusive across the continent. The prevailing challenge remains the
implementation gap, where decentralization rhetoric often diverges from practice,
highlighting the complex dynamics of governance reform in Africa.

Why decentralise?
Most decentralisation efforts have both explicit and implicit objectives. Those objectives
likely to appeal to the general public, such as local empowerment and administrative
efficiency, are generally explicitly stated, while less popular ones, such as increasing central
control and “passing the buck”, are unlikely to be voiced. Diana Conyers (2000:9)

Ribot delves into the multifaceted reasons driving decentralisation across African countries.
Economic crises serve as catalysts, prompting central governments to share fiscal and
administrative burdens with local authorities. For instance, Guinea's decentralisation was
propelled by the government's desire to respond to populist political success, framing it as a
project for societal solidarity. Similarly, administrative burdens and donor pressures
contribute to decentralisation efforts. In Uganda, decentralisation reforms were spurred by
economic crises, aiming to alleviate the strain on the central government while also
addressing local needs. Additionally, tensions between central and local authorities can
prompt decentralization as a means of redistributing power and fostering collaboration.

Expectations and Objectives:

Ribot explores the diverse expectations and objectives associated with decentralisation
reforms. In Burkina Faso, decentralisation is envisioned as reinforcing local democracy,
grassroots participation, and overall development. However, the expectations vary across
regions and political contexts. Senegal, for example, emphasises rural development through
decentralisation, reflecting its unique priorities and challenges. Each country's perspective
reflects its distinct historical, cultural, and socioeconomic factors, shaping the perceived
benefits and goals of decentralisation.

Efficiency:

The argument for increased administrative efficiency through decentralisation is examined in

detail. Proponents suggest that decision-making at the local level is more responsive and
effective, drawing on local knowledge and preferences. Decentralisation is believed to
streamline processes and improve resource allocation, leading to quicker and more flexible
decision-making. For instance, decentralised planning in Uganda has demonstrated
effectiveness in rural development initiatives, leveraging local expertise and community input
to achieve tangible outcomes.

Equity:

Ribot discusses the potential of decentralization to enhance procedural and distributional

equity. However, challenges remain in implementing equitable processes and outcomes.
Mamdani's argument about the inequitable circumstances faced by rural populations across
Africa highlights the need for procedural reforms. Gender equity is also addressed, with
examples such as Uganda's decentralized rural council system ensuring women's
representation in decision-making processes.
Service Provision:

The relationship between decentralization and service delivery is explored, with a focus on
responsiveness and effectiveness. While decentralization is expected to improve service
provision by tailoring decision-making to local needs, evidence regarding its impact remains
mixed. Uganda's experience illustrates improved resource control for civil service staff but
indicates discrepancies in perceived service quality. Tensions between central mandates and
local priorities underscore the complexities of decentralized service delivery.

Participation and Democratization:

Ribot investigates the role of participation in decentralization efforts and its connection to
democratization. Decentralization is touted as a means to increase citizen participation in
governance, fostering inclusivity and accountability. Zimbabwe's advocacy for participation
in development planning exemplifies efforts to empower local communities in decision-
making processes. However, challenges persist in institutionalizing meaningful participation
and ensuring representative local governance structures.

National Cohesion and Central Control:

Decentralization serves as a tool for maintaining political stability and national unity amidst
local demands for autonomy. Ethiopia's use of decentralization to address secessionist
tendencies highlights its role in peace negotiations and state legitimacy. Moreover,
decentralization reinforces ruling party control over local activities, especially in one-party
states like Zambia and Uganda.

Local Empowerment, Fiscal Crisis, Development, and Poverty Reduction:

Decentralization is advocated for various motives, including local empowerment, donor

conditions, and poverty alleviation. Local organizations, international agencies, and central
governments may support decentralization for diverse purposes, from preventing secession to
promoting democracy. Fiscal crises drive decentralization efforts, compelling reductions in
public expenditure and increased donor support. However, the evidence regarding poverty
alleviation through decentralized governance is inconclusive, requiring strong commitment
from national governments to address local needs effectively.

Actors, Powers, and Accountability:

Ribot's framework emphasizes the importance of local actors, the powers they wield, and the
accountability relations they operate in decentralization processes. Various actors, including
elected bodies, traditional authorities, and NGOs, receive powers in the name of
decentralization, shaping outcomes and accountability mechanisms. Elected councils, chiefs,
NGOs, and administrative bodies play significant roles, with their inclusion posing questions
about representativeness and accountability. Establishing representative local governance
structures is crucial for sustainable participation and democratic decentralization,
necessitating robust accountability mechanisms and inclusive decision-making processes.

Implementing Democratic Decentralization:

Successful implementation involves addressing administrative-political relations, planning
processes, and capacity-building initiatives while fostering an enabling environment for local
governance. Central governments often compensate for loss of direct control by increasing
regulation of subnational governments, hindering true decentralization. Planning processes
must balance national goals with local needs to prevent recentralization of powers. Creating
an enabling environment requires broader institutional, political, and economic reforms to
maximize popular participation and effectiveness in service delivery.

Legitimacy, Governance Effectiveness, and Conflict Resolution:

Ribot emphasizes the importance of legitimate, empowered local governance structures and
effective dispute resolution mechanisms to address conflicts during decentralisation
processes. Legitimacy is crucial for governance effectiveness, derived from local
government's ability to tax and make meaningful decisions. Elite capture, central control, and
implementation challenges pose significant hurdles, underscoring the need for context-
specific approaches to empower communities and ensure equitable governance.

Privatization vs. Decentralization:

Ribot draws a distinction between privatization and decentralization, highlighting the

potential pitfalls of privatization reforms in contrast to genuine decentralization efforts.
Privatization entails transferring public resources to private entities, potentially excluding
marginalized groups and prioritizing private interests over public welfare. In contrast,
decentralization aims to empower local communities and foster inclusive governance,
necessitating careful attention to power dynamics and accountability mechanisms.

Conclusion:

Ribot's analysis underscores the complexities and challenges inherent in decentralization

processes, emphasizing the need for context-specific approaches to empower communities
and ensure equitable governance. By addressing elite capture, central control, and
implementation challenges, policymakers can strive for more inclusive decentralization
outcomes that promote democratic participation and sustainable development.

Decentralisation and inclusive governance

in fragile settings: Lessons for the Sahel by
Loic Bisson
Abstract
Countries in the Sahel are currently involved in decades-long decentralisation reforms.
Decentralisation promises more inclusive governance and reduced fragility. International
donors have channelled massive resources into decentralisation programming efforts as to
strengthen local governments as entry points for service delivery. But while unitary
centralised systems of governance have failed to deliver, decentralisation is no panacea
either. Bringing governance ‘closer to the people’ brings national challenges at local level:
poor institutional capacity, elite capture and political conflict. How can decentralisation
programming efforts in the Sahel play a role in inclusive governance and conflict resolution?
Past decentralisation efforts in sub-Saharan Africa suggest certain conditions, as well as
design and implementation processes need to be in place for decentralisation to succeed.
Policymakers should guarantee sustained financial and human resources; engage more
actively local governments in conflict resolution; focus on the process of enhancing local
governance as a result with its own intrinsic value; and think more strategically about which
service delivery sector they should support.

Introduction
Decentralisation efforts in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso are crucial for addressing
longstanding governance challenges and navigating complex security crises in the Sahel
region. Historically, these countries have operated under highly centralised unitary states
inherited from colonial rule, which have often led to marginalisation, inequality, and conflict.
By devolving power and resources to local governments, decentralisation aims to empower
communities, improve service delivery, and foster participatory democracy.

However, the path to decentralisation is fraught with challenges. Weak institutional capacity
at the local level, elite capture, corruption, and competition for resources and political power
can hinder progress. Additionally, security threats exacerbate these issues, making effective
governance and conflict resolution even more challenging.

To overcome these obstacles, policymakers must ensure sustained financial and human
resources to support decentralisation efforts. This includes investing in capacity-building
initiatives and providing technical assistance to strengthen local governance structures.
Moreover, active engagement with local governments in conflict resolution processes is
essential for building trust and promoting stability.

Furthermore, decentralisation should not be viewed solely as a means to an end but rather as
a valuable process in itself. Enhancing local governance carries intrinsic value in promoting
community participation, accountability, and social cohesion.

Strategic support for key service delivery sectors is also crucial. Prioritising sectors such as
education, healthcare, and infrastructure can have a transformative impact on local
communities and contribute to peacebuilding and development.

Drawing lessons from past decentralisation processes in similar contexts can provide valuable
insights into effective reform strategies and potential pitfalls to avoid. By learning from both
successes and failures, policymakers can craft informed policies and initiatives tailored to the
specific needs and challenges of Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso. Ultimately, decentralisation
offers a promising pathway towards inclusive governance and conflict resolution in the Sahel,
but its success depends on careful planning, sustained commitment, and adaptive
implementation.

Most decentralisation reforms administer rather than enfranchise.

Ambitious theories of change
The concept of decentralisation encompasses various forms, but its core principle involves
transferring authority, responsibility, and accountability from central governments to
subnational units. This transfer includes administrative, fiscal, and political powers to lower
levels of government, aiming to empower local communities and enhance governance.

Two main conceptions of the role of decentralised local governments in fragile settings
emerge: one sees them as crucial for service delivery and social cohesion, while the other
views them as conflict resolution actors. The former emphasizes enhancing service delivery,
tailoring policies to local needs, and promoting citizen participation to bolster democracy and
inclusive governance. The latter focuses on managing conflict, addressing group cleavages,
and preventing violence by providing autonomy and self-governance to local communities.

However, the reality of decentralisation often falls short of its promises, leading to several
challenges on the ground. One major dilemma lies in the differential between duties and
means, where subnational governments lack autonomy, resources, and capacity to effectively
implement decentralisation. This discrepancy can stem from central governments' reluctance
to grant real autonomy, insufficient resources allocated to subnational units, unequal
distribution of resources among regions, and imbalances in the relationship between central
and local governments.

Another dilemma arises from the politicisation of local conflicts and disruption of the status
quo. Decentralisation, especially when accompanied by the institutional recognition of ethnic
identities, can exacerbate tensions and create new fault lines within regions. It may also
empower traditional elites, leading to patronage networks and reinforcing existing power
structures.

Additionally, the selection of services to decentralise can impact the effectiveness of

decentralisation efforts. While service delivery is often touted as a solution to fragility, its
impact on state legitimacy and stability varies depending on the context. In some cases,
contested distribution arrangements, such as land ownership, hold greater importance for
legitimacy than basic service provision.

In summary, while decentralisation holds potential benefits for inclusive governance and
conflict resolution, its implementation is fraught with challenges that require careful
consideration of institutional design, resource allocation, and local dynamics.

Examples
1. Senegal: In Senegal, the central state initially maintained strong oversight over
decentralised territorial entities, depriving local governments of competences legally
transferred to them. Real empowerment of decentralised units only occurred when the
state fully committed to granting them autonomy.
2. Ethiopia: Despite granting regional governments wide-ranging powers, Ethiopia has
failed to provide sufficient financial resources for effective implementation. This
imbalance in the constitution has hindered the ability of local governments to
administer their newfound competences effectively.
 3. Uganda: Uganda's decentralisation efforts, which included creating new local
government districts, suffered from a lack of resources and infrastructure, resulting in
a proliferation of government units with insufficient capacity to deliver services.
4. Cameroon: The introduction of decentralisation in Cameroon, particularly in forestry
management, led to conflicts between communities over access to resources. The
transfer of management responsibilities to local communities sparked violence as
different groups competed for control.
5. Benin: Decentralisation reforms in Benin, initiated in the early 1990s, failed to
incorporate accountability and better governance, leading to increased power for
customary or neo-traditionalist actors within local jurisdictions.
6. Pakistan: In Pakistan, despite providing basic services like free healthcare and
education, legitimacy and stability were measured primarily by the right to manage
land ownership. Land reform clashed with customary land tenure systems, causing
armed contestation between different social groups.

Why this matters for the Sahel?

Decentralisation matters for the Sahel because it mirrors the challenges observed elsewhere,
such as in Mali. Despite decentralisation in principle, central government ministries still
retain substantial authority over local affairs like health and education. Budget transfers
require agreements between communes and central structures, but resources and capabilities
aren't fully aligned with local implementation responsibilities. Insufficient financial resources
transferred from the central government hinder local authorities' ability to fulfill their
mandates, with over 80 percent of local revenues coming from central transfers. This lack of
resources limits technical and administrative capacity, creating a cycle where central
government is reluctant to transfer more resources. Additionally, resources are not distributed
equitably, with poorer regions receiving fewer funds. Furthermore, decentralisation has led to
increased local competition and political violence, as local elections became arenas for power
struggles. Overall, policymakers in the Sahel need to provide genuine autonomy and
sufficient resources to subnational units, consider socio-economic and political realities,
transcend donor-driven approaches, and focus on both outcomes and processes to build
sustainable governance structures.

Lessons for policymakers

The author highlights four key lessons for policymakers:

1. Provide Genuine Autonomy and Sufficient Resources: Policymakers should ensure

subnational units receive genuine autonomy and sustained financial and human
resources to effectively carry out their responsibilities. Fiscal decentralization must be
accompanied by the necessary resources for local governments to function effectively.
2. Transcend Donor-Driven Approaches: Decentralization efforts should move
beyond donor-driven approaches and focus on fostering local governance in a
democratic and bottom-up direction. Donors should support subnational authorities
without imposing specific development outcomes, allowing for true local ownership
of projects.
1. Consider Socio-Economic and Political Realities: Policymakers need to take
into account the socio-economic and political landscape of the region when
designing decentralization programs. This involves involving local
 governments in conflict reduction efforts and recognizing the role of local
non-state institutions in conveying grievances to the state.
3. Focus on Outcomes and Processes: Policymakers should focus not only on specific
development outcomes but also on the process of improving local governance. Fair
and inclusive delivery of services is crucial, and policymakers should identify which
service delivery sectors are most relevant for legitimacy and fragility in the region.
4. Global thinking local action

Week 10 Readings
Decentralisation and Development: The
Malawian Experience
Abstract
The reorientation of the local government system towards decentralisation has been at the
centre stage in most developing countries, including Malawi, since the advent of multiparty
democracy in the 1990s. The justification for the adoption of some form of decentralisation is
to promote democratic governance and participatory approaches in development. The
primary purpose in this article is to analyse the context within which decentralisation
initiatives are undertaken in Malawi and to assess the extent to which decentralisation
promotes participatory approaches in development. This paper is based primarily on
documentary research and supplemented by interviews conducted with senior officials from
local authorities and with selected members of the public.

Introduction:
The introduction sets the stage by contextualizing decentralization within Malawi's historical
and political landscape. It notes that decentralization initiatives have roots dating back to the
colonial era but primarily focuses on developments since independence in 1964. Following
the transition to multiparty democracy in the 1990s, there was a notable shift towards
reorienting the local governance system towards decentralization or devolution. This period
saw significant legislative efforts, including the adoption of key laws such as the Republic of
Malawi Constitution Act No.7 of 1995 and the Local Government Act No. 42 of 1998,
alongside the formulation of the Malawi Decentralization Policy.

These legislative measures signify a deliberate effort by the Malawian government to

empower local governance structures and distribute decision-making powers from the central
authority to local institutions. The introduction underscores the importance of understanding
the broader context in which these decentralization initiatives occur and their subsequent
outcomes. By examining the historical trajectory and legislative framework, the introduction
lays the foundation for exploring the challenges, successes, and lessons learned from
Malawi's experience with decentralization. Ultimately, it sets the stage for a comprehensive
analysis aimed at identifying strategies for effective decentralization and sustainable local
development in Malawi.

Conceptual underpinnings: Decentralisation and

development
Concepts such as decentralization, development, and citizen participation play crucial roles in
shaping governance structures and development strategies. Decentralization encompasses
various forms, including delegation, participation, divisionalization, déconcentration, and
devolution. While the specifics may vary, decentralization generally involves transferring
authority and power from higher to lower levels of organizational hierarchy to enhance
service delivery efficiency. In the context of most developing countries, including Malawi,
déconcentration and devolution are the primary forms adopted. Déconcentration involves
transferring workload and decision-making authority within central government ministries,
while devolution entails delegating power to local government units, granting them a degree
of autonomy.

Development, a complex and multifaceted concept, defies standard definition due to its
association with diverse interpretations. Economists often focus on economic growth,
quantifiable indicators like gross national product, and per capita income. However,
development extends beyond economic metrics to encompass structural transformation,
public welfare, poverty reduction, and citizen participation. In the Malawian context,
development is intertwined with modernization, access to essential services, and citizen
involvement in decision-making processes. This broader view of development emphasizes
social well-being, citizen empowerment, and grassroots participation in partnership with the
government to enhance political and socio-economic conditions.

Citizen participation, a multidisciplinary concept, encompasses various aspects of democratic

theory, including political behavior, community development, citizen action, and
government-initiated citizen action. Definitions and terminology may vary across disciplines,
but citizen participation generally refers to the involvement of individuals in democratic
processes, community development initiatives, and government-led programs. In Malawi,
citizen participation is integral to fostering inclusive governance and grassroots
empowerment, enabling local communities to collaborate with the government in improving
their socio-economic conditions.

Relationship between decentRalisation and developmeNt

Political and administrative decentralization is often seen as a means to enhance citizen
participation in governance and development processes. However, the relationship between
decentralization and citizen participation can vary depending on specific circumstances.
While some argue for a direct linkage between the two, others suggest that the relationship is
more nuanced and context-dependent.

Decentralized local governance structures are generally believed to promote participatory

development by enabling the formulation of policies and plans tailored to local needs and
conditions. Citizens' involvement in decision-making processes facilitates the creation of
realistic development plans that address local circumstances effectively. Administratively,
decentralization is viewed as a strategy to alleviate the burden on over-centralized
government agencies, leading to greater efficiency and coordination in resource allocation
and service delivery. By granting local institutions decision-making powers, decentralization
reduces delays in decision-making and enhances responsiveness to local needs, thereby
promoting effective project management and development.

However, decentralization and participatory approaches in development are not without

criticism. Some scholars argue that decentralization can reinforce narrow sectional interests,
threaten national unity, and exacerbate development inequalities by emphasizing local
autonomy. Similarly, participatory approaches have been criticized for their methodological
limitations, potential for abuse or exploitation, and lack of evidence regarding their
effectiveness in ensuring sustainable development and improving the lives of marginalized
populations. There is ongoing debate over issues such as the use of terminology, the
objectives of participation, and the appropriateness of participatory techniques and tools.

While acknowledging these criticisms, this analysis focuses primarily on highlighting

Malawi's experiences with decentralization and development, identifying major challenges,
and moving towards a deeper understanding of the contextual factors shaping these
processes.

Decentralisation in Africa-Overview
Decentralization initiatives in Africa have evolved over time, initially emerging as a
component of nation-building efforts at the dawn of independence. Development committees
were established at the district level to facilitate planning and development. From the 1960s
to the 1980s, decentralization initiatives were closely tied to nation-building endeavors. The
introduction of Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) in subsequent years led to the
implementation of district-focused rural development programs aimed at enhancing citizen
participation in decision-making.

The wave of democratization and globalization since the 1980s has further propelled African
countries to adopt political and administrative decentralization policies. These policies
involve delegating responsibilities for service provision and infrastructure development to
sub-national institutions such as district councils, community-based groups, and NGOs.
However, the interpretation and implementation of decentralization vary across countries,
reflecting prevailing ideologies of development. Despite diverse approaches, decentralization
is generally viewed as promoting citizen participation in decision-making, a fundamental
aspect of political democracy.

In practice, the outcomes of decentralization initiatives in African countries have often fallen
short of expectations. Many decentralized structures have failed to effectively involve
citizens in decision-making processes related to development. Instead, they have operated as
extensions of central agencies, lacking autonomy and functioning primarily as instruments of
central control. Centralized management remains predominant in many countries, despite
political rhetoric favoring decentralization. Challenges faced by local governments include a
lack of autonomy, heavy reliance on central government policies, insufficient financial
resources, and administrative capacity constraints.
Decentralization has not only failed to promote democratic governance and participatory
development but has also exacerbated regional inequalities. Financially better-off areas have
prospered, while rural areas have lagged behind. Success in decentralization depends on
various internal and external factors, including institutional capacity, technology, economic
factors, and political dynamics. Consequently, there is no automatic relationship between
decentralization and development, and the success of decentralization efforts hinges on the
unique circumstances of each country. In the case of Malawi, the following section will
examine the specific situation regarding decentralization.

Decentralisation and development in Malawi

The history of decentralization and development in Malawi dates back to the early years of
independence under the Banda regime. District development committees (DDCs) were
established in 1965 to facilitate decentralized planning and foster dialogue between the
government and local communities. However, citizen participation in development was often
manipulated and politicized, with local people having limited roles in governance processes.
The one-party rule characterized by political intimidation, centralization, and repression
hindered meaningful participation at the local level. Subsequently, legislative changes further
diminished the autonomy and decision-making powers of district councils, leading to
ineffective governance and development efforts at the local level.

Government initiatives and 1993 district focus structures

In response to the need for effective decentralization and citizen participation in
development, the Malawi government implemented the district focus development policy in
1993. This policy aimed to strengthen local structures and promote grassroots involvement in
governance and development. The strategy involved creating sub-national planning
structures, establishing the District Development Fund, and reorganizing the composition of
District Development Committees (DDCs) to enhance representation and reflect community
views. Additionally, area and village development committees were reorganized to improve
governance and grassroots participation in project management. However, the strategy
primarily focused on administrative delegation rather than devolution of powers to local
government institutions.

Decentralisation initiatives in the multi-party dispensation

The transition to a multiparty system in Malawi in 1994 led to a shift from administrative
decentralization to political decentralization. The focus shifted towards empowering local
governance structures, particularly through the establishment of district assemblies and the
adoption of decentralization policies. The Constitution, Local Government Act, and
Decentralization Policy aimed to promote democratic principles, accountability, and
grassroots participation in decision-making and development.

District assemblies, composed of elected councillors, traditional chiefs, parliament

representatives, and appointed members, were established to consolidate democratic
institutions and oversee local governance. However, challenges such as centralization,
bureaucratic controls, and limited local autonomy hinder effective citizen participation. The
central government retains significant control over local affairs, including staffing and
decision-making processes.

Additionally, the lack of coordination among government ministries in decentralization

efforts, bureaucratic delays, and the hereditary nature of traditional leadership further
complicate participatory development.

Many grassroots structures exist only on paper, with limited awareness and capacity among
local

populations. This situation undermines the intended objectives of decentralization, despite

generating enthusiasm for citizen involvement in decision-making.

The context of decentralisation and citizen participation in

Malawi
The context of decentralization and citizen participation in Malawi is influenced by various
political, socio-economic, administrative, and financial factors, all of which impact the
effectiveness of participatory development initiatives.

Political Factors:

• Political Intolerance: Despite a multiparty system, there's a culture of antagonism

and lack of tolerance among political opponents, affecting citizen participation.
Elections are often polarized along regional and ethnic lines, leading to contested
results and allegations of electoral malpractice.
• Influence of Political Parties: Villagers may feel unwilling to participate in
development projects initiated by a party they don't support, leading to uneven
distribution of resources and projects.
• Elite Dominance: Key individuals or elites often dominate decision-making
processes, reinforcing the interests of the powerful rather than addressing the needs of
the grassroots.

Socio-economic Factors:

• Poverty and Illiteracy: High levels of poverty and illiteracy contribute to apathy and
lack of active participation in development activities. Many citizens rely on
government handouts, affecting their political awareness and engagement.
• Lack of Awareness: Limited understanding of the roles and responsibilities of local
governance structures hampers effective participation. Education and awareness
programs are crucial for empowering citizens to engage meaningfully in local affairs.

Administrative Factors:

• Shortage of Qualified Staff: Rural district assemblies face challenges due to a

shortage of qualified personnel, particularly in financial management and planning.
This hampers the effective implementation of decentralization policies and
participatory development strategies.
 • Financial Management Issues: District assemblies often face chronic financial
problems due to a narrow resource base, inadequate revenue generation, and
inefficient financial management systems. This affects their ability to fund and
implement development projects.

Conclusion:

• Despite the legal framework supporting decentralization and citizen participation,

various challenges hinder their effective implementation.
• There's a need for political tolerance, empowerment of grassroots structures, capacity
building, and improved financial management to promote genuine citizen
participation in development.
• Strengthening bottom-up approaches, promoting local autonomy, and addressing
socio-economic inequalities are essential for realizing the goals of decentralization
and participatory governance in Malawi.

Overall, while decentralization initiatives have raised awareness and expectations for
participatory governance, significant challenges persist in translating these ideals into
effective local governance and development practices.

Presentation:
Abstract:

Decentralisation in Malawi since the 1990s aims to promote democratic governance and
participatory approaches in development. This analysis examines the context of
decentralisation initiatives in Malawi and assesses their impact on promoting participatory
approaches in development, drawing from documentary research and interviews.

Introduction:

Malawi's decentralisation efforts date back to the colonial era but gained momentum with the
transition to multiparty democracy. Legislative measures, including key laws and the Malawi
Decentralisation Policy, signify the government's commitment to empowering local
governance structures. This introduction sets the stage for exploring Malawi's experience
with decentralisation, highlighting challenges, successes, and lessons learned.

Conceptual underpinnings: Decentralisation and development:

Decentralisation, development, and citizen participation are crucial concepts shaping

governance and development strategies. Decentralisation involves transferring authority from
higher to lower levels of hierarchy, while development encompasses economic growth,
public welfare, and poverty reduction. Citizen participation refers to involvement in
democratic processes and community development. These concepts provide the framework
for understanding Malawi's decentralisation journey.

Relationship between decentralisation and development:

Decentralisation is seen as promoting participatory development by tailoring policies to local
needs and enhancing service delivery efficiency. However, challenges include reinforcing
sectional interests and methodological limitations in participatory approaches. Malawi's
experience with decentralisation and development highlights these complexities.

Decentralisation in Africa-Overview:

Decentralisation initiatives in Africa evolved from nation-building efforts to political and

administrative reforms. Despite the rhetoric favoring decentralisation, challenges such as lack
of autonomy and regional inequalities persist. Malawi's decentralisation efforts reflect these
broader trends.

Decentralisation and development in Malawi:

Malawi's history of decentralisation dates back to the Banda regime, with subsequent
initiatives aimed at strengthening local governance structures. However, challenges such as
political intolerance and administrative constraints hinder effective citizen participation.
Despite legal frameworks supporting decentralisation, translating ideals into practice remains
a challenge.

Conclusion:

Malawi's experience with decentralisation highlights the complexities and challenges of

promoting participatory governance and sustainable development. Addressing political,
socio-economic, and administrative factors is essential for realising the goals of
decentralisation and participatory governance in Malawi.

Week 11 Reading
Decentralisation and recentralisation in
South Africa’s local government: case
studies of two municipalities in Limpopo by
Dr. Thokozani Chilenga-Butao
Abstract
Democratic decentralisation was introduced in South Africa during the transition to
democracy (1990-1994). It followed a long trajectory of centralisation and decentralisation
processes that took place during apartheid. This paper argues that in order to more adequately
understand the prospects for decentralisation to achieve its intended outcomes in South
African local government, one has to understand some of the complexities and political
dynamics present in this sphere of government. In so doing, it shows that the intended
outcomes of decentralisation are far from the realities of local government on the ground,
specifically municipalities. Case studies of two Limpopo mining town municipalities,
Lephalale and Mogalakwena, are used to demonstrate some of these complexities and
political dynamics.

The Mogalakwena case study will show that, despite the codification of recentralisation in the
South African constitution, regional and political party elites misuse the policy to politically
interfere in municipalities. The effects of this are that service delivery slows down and local
government is subjected to localised national and provincial political battles. The Lephalale
case study shows how the layers of decentralisation between apartheid and democracy have
led to this municipality being dependent on private and parastatal mining companies for the
provision of and access to public goods and services.

Introduction
National Level

Constitutional Framework and Legal Codification: The South African Constitution of

1996, along with the Municipal Structures Act of 1998 and the Intergovernmental Relations
Framework Act of 2005, provides a comprehensive legal framework for decentralisation.
These documents were designed to empower local governments, granting them the authority
to deliver basic services to their communities. Specifically, Schedule 4 Part B of the
Constitution, together with Sections 83 and 84 of the Municipal Structures Act, outlines the
responsibilities of local governments. This legal structure aims to facilitate a localised
approach to service delivery, tailored to meet the specific needs of different communities
across South Africa.

Historical Legacy and Decentralisation: The complexities of decentralisation in South

Africa cannot be fully understood without acknowledging the historical legacy of apartheid.
During apartheid, decentralisation efforts were used to enforce segregation and control rather
than to empower local governance. These historical practices have left a lasting impact on the
effectiveness of contemporary decentralisation. Despite the progressive legal framework
established post-apartheid, there remains a significant disparity between the legal (de jure)
intentions of decentralisation and the practical (de facto) realities. This gap poses a major
challenge to the efficacy of local governance in delivering services and achieving democratic
decentralisation goals.

Challenges in Implementation: The implementation of decentralisation in South Africa is

fraught with challenges. Fiscal constraints often limit the ability of local governments to fund
their responsibilities adequately. Additionally, many local municipalities struggle with a lack
of capacity, meaning they do not have the necessary skills or resources to implement policies
effectively. Furthermore, insufficient regulation and oversight exacerbate these issues.
Political dynamics also play a critical role, with national and provincial elites sometimes
misusing recentralisation measures to exert control over local governments. This misuse can
hinder local governance, creating an environment where service delivery is compromised.

Provincial Level

Role in Recentralisation: Provincial governments in South Africa are pivotal in the process
of recentralisation, which involves rescinding the devolved powers of local governments
when they fail to provide services effectively. When local municipalities struggle, provincial
governments often intervene. However, this intervention can have mixed results. While it can
address immediate service delivery failures, it can also lead to slower service delivery overall
and entangle local governance in broader national and provincial political conflicts.

Political Interference: Provincial governments are not immune to the influence of political
dynamics. In some cases, provincial elites misuse legislated recentralisation powers to
interfere politically in municipal governance. This interference can derail local governance
efforts, slowing down service delivery and complicating the political landscape. The political
battles that play out at the provincial level often manifest locally, further disrupting the ability
of municipalities to function effectively and meet their obligations to their communities.

Case Studies and Provincial Impact: Case studies of municipalities like Mogalakwena and
Lephalale illustrate the impact of provincial governance on local municipalities. In
Mogalakwena, political interference by provincial elites has led to significant governance
challenges, disrupting service delivery and complicating local administration. In Lephalale,
the municipality's dependency on private and parastatal mining companies for service
provision highlights the need for strategic recentralisation by provincial authorities. This case
underscores the importance of coordinated efforts to ensure sustainable and effective local
governance, free from undue political interference.

Local Level

Municipalities as Interfaces: Local governments are designed to be the closest interface

between the state and society, responsible for delivering basic services to their communities.
This proximity is intended to facilitate better responsiveness, transparency, and accountability
in governance. The effectiveness of local governments is crucial for achieving the broader
objectives of decentralisation, such as promoting democracy, enhancing public participation,
and improving service delivery.

Complexities of Local Governance: Despite the idealistic framework, local municipalities

in South Africa face numerous challenges that hinder their ability to deliver services
effectively. Fiscal autonomy is limited, and many municipalities lack the capacity to manage
their responsibilities properly. The skills and resources necessary for effective planning and
policy implementation are often deficient. Additionally, historical legacies of apartheid,
combined with ongoing political interference, further complicate the ability of local
governments to fulfill their mandates.

Empirical Findings from Case Studies: Research into the Mogalakwena and Lephalale
municipalities provides empirical evidence of the challenges faced by local governments in
South Africa. In Mogalakwena, political interference has significantly hindered governance
and slowed down service delivery. The municipality has become a battleground for
provincial and national political conflicts, detracting from its primary role of serving the
community. In Lephalale, the reliance on mining companies for public goods and services
highlights the inadequacies of local governance and the need for a more strategic approach to
recentralisation. These case studies illustrate the nuanced realities and dynamics of
decentralisation, offering valuable insights into the administrative and political hurdles that
local governments must navigate.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the process of decentralisation in South Africa, while well-intentioned and
legally supported, faces significant challenges in practice. The historical legacies of
apartheid, combined with fiscal constraints, capacity issues, and political interference, create
a complex environment for local governance. The cases of Mogalakwena and Lephalale
municipalities highlight these challenges, showing how local governments struggle with both
internal and external pressures. To achieve the intended outcomes of decentralisation,
continuous improvement and strategic recentralisation efforts are necessary. This approach
must balance empowering local governments with providing the oversight and support
needed to ensure effective and sustainable service delivery.

Compromise and Continuity

Historical Context of Decentralisation: The long history of decentralisation in South Africa

is marked by a continuous compromise between centralising and decentralising tendencies,
beginning in the apartheid years and continuing into the democratic era. Before democracy,
decentralisation can be divided into three main periods: the Union of South Africa phase
(1910-1948), the era of grand apartheid (1948-1982), and the period of reform and the
eventual collapse of apartheid (1982-1994) . During the first period, a central national
government governed four provinces, with local municipalities overseeing urban areas
primarily for the white population. This system created a dualistic structure where white
minority interests were managed alongside a centrally controlled administration for the black
majority, heavily influenced by the Department of Native Affairs and a network of native
commissioners and tribal authorities .

Grand Apartheid and Decentralisation: In the grand apartheid period (1948-1982),

decentralisation became a tool for reinforcing racial segregation. Centralised control
intensified, particularly over the lives of black South Africans through restrictive measures on
movement, labor market access, and urban accommodation. Simultaneously, the apartheid
state embarked on a convoluted form of decentralisation, creating bantustans with some
administrative powers and introducing Urban Bantu Councils and later Community Councils,
ostensibly to provide local governance for black communities within 'white South Africa' .
These measures, however, were a façade, as they allowed the apartheid government to
abdicate responsibility for infrastructure and service delivery to African people, thereby
entrenching racial divisions and inadequate local governance .

Collapse of Apartheid and Transitional Reforms: During the final phase of apartheid
(1982-1994), the government attempted to introduce reforms aimed at 'power sharing'
between different racial groups through the establishment of nine development regions and
multiracial Regional Services Councils. These efforts were designed to mitigate resistance to
the apartheid regime and address the demands for its end. However, structures like the Black
Local Authorities, established under the Black Local Authorities Act of 1982, were
underfunded and led by individuals approved by the national government, making them
targets of anti-apartheid resistance . Consequently, decentralisation during apartheid served
more as a mechanism for maintaining control rather than fostering genuine local governance.

Democratic Decentralisation Post-Apartheid: With the end of apartheid, South Africa

transitioned into a phase of democratic decentralisation. The negotiations during the
transition to democracy saw heated debates over the structure of the state, with the National
Party and the Inkatha Freedom Party advocating for federalism, while the African National
Congress (ANC) supported a unitary state with decentralised local governance to enhance
participation and service delivery . The eventual compromise was a decentralised unitary
state where the national government shared some administrative, fiscal, and political powers
with provincial and local governments, under the overarching authority of the Constitution .

Implementation and Challenges in the Democratic Era: The democratic government took
political decentralisation seriously initially, encouraging participatory democracy in local
governance through mechanisms like Integrated Development Plans (IDPs). These were
intended to involve local communities in developmental policymaking . However, over time,
this enthusiasm waned due to the ANC's electoral dominance, which reduced the incentive
for sustained community participation. The government increasingly outsourced local
planning to consultants, marginalising community structures and diminishing the
effectiveness of participatory governance .

Conclusion

The history of decentralisation in South Africa reflects a complex interplay of compromise

and continuity. During apartheid, decentralisation was used to entrench racial segregation and
maintain central control over the black majority, while post-apartheid efforts aimed at
fostering democratic governance and local participation. Despite a robust legal framework,
the transition has faced significant challenges, including political interference, capacity
constraints, and historical legacies. Understanding this nuanced history is crucial for
addressing the ongoing issues in South Africa's decentralised governance and ensuring
effective and equitable service delivery in the future.

Why Has So Little Changed?

The historical legacies of local government in South Africa and its intricate political
dynamics have greatly complicated the implementation of democratic decentralisation. This
issue is further elucidated by theories suggesting that recentralisation—the re-imposition of
national authority—has failed to adequately empower local governments. However, in South
Africa, recentralisation serves dual purposes: political motives and restorative measures for
municipalities unable to fulfill their mandates (Chilenga-Butao 2019). This phenomenon is
often a consequence of poorly planned and executed decentralisation reforms, which fail to
translate idealised outcomes into reality.

The Ideal vs. Actual Decentralisation

Olowu and Wunsch describe the gap between the ‘idealised’ and ‘actual’ results of
decentralisation reforms. Ideally, decentralisation should lead to the devolution of powers,
enhanced local accountability, greater public participation, and improved service provision.
However, the actual process is often marred by incomplete statutory reforms, retention of
resources by central actors, consumption of local resources by salaries, ineffective local
councils due to low education levels, internal divisions, executive dominance, and designs
that maintain central control or allow local elites to dominate governance (Olowu and
Wunsch 2003). These issues, summarized as ‘elite capture’, ‘capacity constraints’, and
‘financial constraints’, necessitate increased oversight and dependence on national
government (Siddle and Koelble 2012).

Dependency on Patronage Networks

Recentralisation also occurs when local governments lack the capacity to function
independently, leading to dependency on patronage networks for daily operations. This
dependency erodes the ability of local governments to maintain a balance with central
authorities in intergovernmental relations, especially as the number of local government units
increases (Erk 2014). The Constitution of South Africa provides for recentralisation through
interventions under Sections 100 and 139, allowing national or provincial governments to
take over subnational administrations. However, gaps in the legislative framework for
interventions can lead to their politically motivated misuse (Chilenga-Butao 2019; Rampedi
and Ledger 2019).

Political Dynamics and Local Governance

Political dynamics further complicate local governance. Manor points out that the White
Paper on Local Government 1998 falls short in providing the necessary implementation
details for successful democratic decentralisation. Essential prerequisites, such as significant
financial resources, substantial powers for local governments, and accountability
mechanisms, are often lacking (Manor 2001). Local government resources are predominantly
controlled by national and provincial spheres, leaving local governments to perform complex
tasks with limited resources. Furthermore, elected officials, who should be accountable to
their constituents, are often beholden to bureaucrats, diminishing their effectiveness (Manor
2001).

Interference by Political Elites

Siddle and Koelble highlight that local government executive structures are frequently
targeted by political elites, leading to interference in municipal operations. This political
meddling manifests through the suspension and sidelining of officials who do not align with
the prevailing political faction, undue pressure on officials, and politically motivated
appointments. Such interference creates tensions between good governance and party-
political demands (Siddle and Koelble 2012). Provincial and party elites exploit interventions
to manipulate executive positions in local municipalities, undermining the intentions of
decentralisation and facilitating recentralisation.

Conclusion

The persistent challenges facing South Africa’s local government are rooted in a complex
interplay of historical legacies, political dynamics, and structural inefficiencies. Despite the
transition to democratic decentralisation, the ideal outcomes envisioned have not materialized
due to poorly executed reforms, capacity constraints, financial limitations, and political
interference. These factors have necessitated recentralisation as both a corrective and a
politically motivated measure, further complicating the realisation of effective and
autonomous local governance. Understanding these intricate dynamics is crucial for
addressing the ongoing issues and achieving the intended benefits of decentralisation in South
Africa.

The Position of Mining Towns in Limpopo: Lephalale and Mogalakwena

Historical Context and Economic Dependencies

Lephalale and Mogalakwena are two municipalities in Limpopo that highlight the intricate
interplay between local governance, economic interests, and historical legacies. Both regions
have significant mining activities that shape their economic landscapes and local governance
dynamics.

Lephalale, formerly known as Ellisras, developed into a mining hub in the late 1950s with
coal mining initiated by the Iron and Steel Corporation (ISCOR), a parastatal entity. The
town’s administration was effectively controlled by ISCOR, which resisted municipalisation
under both apartheid and democratic regimes. The privatisation of ISCOR in 1989 and
subsequent formation of Kumba Iron Ore and Exxaro Limited in 2006, along with the
construction of the Medupi Power Station by Eskom, entrenched the town's economic
reliance on these entities. This dependence hampers the municipality's effectiveness in
delivering services independently of these corporations (Phadi and Pearson 2017).

Mogalakwena similarly relies heavily on mining, with large-scale platinum mining

operations beginning in the early 1990s. The municipality includes the town of Mokopane
and 189 villages from the former Lebowa bantustan. Political interference and factional
disputes have frequently disrupted service delivery, exemplified by conflicts involving
municipal manager Willy Kekana and a contested S139 intervention by the provincial
government (Phadi and Pearson 2017).

Challenges in Local Governance

Elite Political Interference in Mogalakwena Decentralisation in Mogalakwena has been

undermined by political elites interfering in administrative processes. The S139 intervention
sought to bypass the municipal leadership for factional gains, reflecting a misuse of
intervention mechanisms meant to stabilize governance but instead used to advance political
agendas. This interference resulted in administrative paralysis and hindered service delivery,
illustrating how political dynamics can derail the intended outcomes of decentralisation
(Phadi and Pearson 2015).

Legacy of Mining Administration in Lephalale Lephalale’s governance has been shaped

by its history as a company town, with ISCOR performing many local government functions
and maintaining significant control even after attempts to establish a municipal council. The
transition to democratic governance faced resistance from entrenched private interests and the
legacy of apartheid-era decentralisation. The amalgamation of the region under the Lephalale
Local Municipality saw private entities like Exxaro retaining control over essential
infrastructure, complicating efforts to establish an inclusive and effective local government
(Phadi and Pearson 2017).

Conclusion

The experiences of Lephalale and Mogalakwena illustrate the complexities of implementing

democratic decentralisation in contexts with strong historical legacies of private control and
political interference. The economic dependence on mining companies and the historical
governance structures have created significant challenges for local governments in these
municipalities. Effective decentralisation in South Africa requires addressing these deeply
rooted issues, ensuring that local governments can operate independently and deliver services
efficiently without undue interference from political elites or private economic interests.
Conclusion

The complexities of governance and politics in South African municipalities highlight

significant discrepancies between the theoretical advantages of decentralisation and the
realities on the ground. These complexities challenge the assumptions about
decentralisation’s benefits and necessitate a nuanced approach to the theories and practical
applications of both decentralisation and recentralisation.

Through the case study of Mogalakwena, it becomes evident that recentralisation, intended
as a restorative measure for administrative dysfunction, is often exploited for political
interference. This misuse limits municipalities' capacity to deliver essential services. Despite
being framed as beneficial for subnational governments, the actions and outcomes of
recentralisation have political ramifications that divert focus from service delivery. Political
battles at the national level are effectively ‘decentralised’ to local governments, creating
highly politicised and polarised work environments. This significantly hampers the ability of
local governments to provide public goods and services, illustrating how provincial and
regional political interference exacerbates the disparity between the intentions and outcomes
of decentralised local governance.

In Lephalale, historical dynamics have rendered current service delivery ineffective,

inefficient, and costly, contrary to the ideals of democratic decentralisation. The legacies of
apartheid-era decentralisation have entrenched patterns of unequal distribution of resources
and infrastructural power, which continue to impede service delivery and the livelihoods of
local residents. However, unlike in Mogalakwena, the challenges in Lephalale are potentially
surmountable with the proper application of S139 interventions. If national and provincial
governments can implement these measures strategically and temporarily, it could address
historical legacies and improve service delivery, thereby reshaping perspectives on
recentralisation.

In conclusion, addressing the gap between the intended outcomes of decentralisation and the
actual realities within municipalities is crucial for improving the lives of people in these
localities. This requires a careful and context-specific application of recentralisation measures
to ensure they support rather than undermine local governance, thereby fulfilling the promise
of democratic decentralisation.