To what extent does decentralisation produce improvements in service delivery for the poor? This paper from the Institute of Development Studies (IDS) argues that political and institutional decentralisation do not currently contribute to increases in either equity or efficiency. However, a poor record on service delivery so far does not rule out scope for improvement. The challenge for proponents of democratic decentralisation is to specify methods by which equity and efficiency can be achieved under decentralised forms of service delivery.
Current evidence suggests that health, education and basic infrastructure services are better administered by public agencies working under the direct control of central government. Quality and efficiency can be improved by introducing private providers and user fees. However, neither of these approaches is conducive to participation in local governance. Nor are they guaranteed to increase equity and social justice in the long term.
Those who advocate local governance and the increased participation of ordinary people have been unable to prove that this benefits the poor in terms of health, education and basic infrastructure. Although participation and accountability are important in their own right, particularly when political rights have been curtailed under centralised authoritarian regimes, they cannot be described as pro-poor unless they improve people’s material well-being. Furthermore, under democratic decentralisation:
- technical capacities of local government staff may not be good enough to produce good quality education, health care and basic infrastructure
- regional disparities in the provision of public services may widen
- macroeconomic risks may increase through increasing government vulnerability to financial deficits and over-expansion in the size of the public sector.
Therefore, while the substantive benefits of democratic decentralisation should not be underestimated, increased participation and accountability alone cannot produce successful education, health and basic infrastructure systems. Hence, it is important to:
- understand the importance of political factors such as commitment, the leadership qualities of local government and mobilization of ordinary people
- pay attention to institutional arrangements such as consultative bodies and consider financial resources and technical and managerial capacity
- measure and monitor the extent to which service delivery under decentralised forms of provision is successful
- ensure that participation in local governance produces real gains for the poor. Failure to do this will undermine the attraction of democratic decentralisation and encourage policy alternatives that run counter to the ethos of participation.
