Has decentralisation produced appropriate intergovernmental relational mechanisms for supporting strong and effective local governance? Has decentralisation led to the creation of effective self-governance structures at the community level? This paper by the Institute of Social Sciences (ISS) looks at the recent experience of democratic decentralisation in Africa.
Compared with other continents, African countries are the least formally decentralised. This is true whether we look at relative expenditure or employee size of local governments compared to the rest of the public sector. Whereas the formal state is centralised, society remains highly decentralised, dispersed in rural communities and villages. The resulting poor integration of state and society structures for development and governance is regarded as a defining feature of Africa’s underdevelopment.
Despite a reluctance to share the monopoly power inherited from the colonial period there is a renewed interest in democratic decentralisation (DD) in many African countries. The factors motivating this are put forward as:
- The failure of centralised public sector management evidenced by economic, fiscal and political crisis.
- Non-state domestic pressures for change. Civil society organisations have become more politically active and more sophisticated in their opposition.
- Pressure from external donors. DD is seen as a key aspect of good governance and therefore has become a condition of aid.
- Africa has experienced growing urbanisation. More than half of the continent’s population live in urban areas but the institutional mechanisms for effective urban management remain poorly developed.
- DD has been used to promote conflict resolution as ruling groups seek to contain or craft compromises with regional or local elites in many parts of Africa.
- Globalisation has been a factor. Free movement of capital between and within countries means that cities can compete for foreign investment, a task once monopolised by central governments.
In spite of a post-colonial history of recentralisation, many African countries under a variety of pressures have recently transferred responsibilities, fiscal and human resources to local communities. Some relative successes have been recorded but there are also instances of retreats into centralised solutions. The conclusions drawn are:
- Adequate mechanisms for local government management and internal accountability are required.
- Provisions for external accountability, principally ‘exit’ and ‘voice’ mechanisms are particularly critical.
- Upward accountability mechanisms are required due to the weakness of local governments and the lack of effective control by their constituents. Downward mechanisms form the basis of decentralised democratic governance.
- Citizens lack information and power to compel local politicians to account. Many local governments remain weak and corrupt, and citizens have often resorted to violence or social resistance.
- It is important to develop appropriate legal and constitutional mechanisms to define a suitable service delivery and resource mobilisation role for local governments.
- Progress has certainly been made but challenges remain in mobilising central political commitment to decentralisation and formalising informal governance mechanisms that emerge from local communities.
