Given the conflicting ideas surrounding the impacts of decentralisation as predicted, this essay argues that while decentralisation may have contributed to improving good governance in certain countries around the world, the contrary holds for sub-Saharan countries. Thus, this essay explores the extent at which decentralisation has contributed to fighting corruption in the sub-Sahara.
Overwhelmed by bad governance, an eyesore of poverty and disease, the relics of prolong corruption and misrule have pushed developing countries in sub-Saharan Africa and their counterparts, the World Bank (WB) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) into political, administrative and economic reforms. Since the 1990s, decentralisation has been a key policy instrument advocated and favoured by governments, donor countries, civil society and international institutions to engender good governance. Many countries in Africa have speedily implemented political, administrative and fiscal decentralisation within the last three decades (Conyers 2007; Dickovick and Wunsch 2014). The primary or perhaps the profound motivation for the wave of decentralisation around the world, particularly in sub-Saharan, is based on the conceptual argument that it offers potential benefits. According to proponents, in a decentralised governance system where power and resources are devolved, services will increase alongside efficiency. Productive and economic growth will inhibit rent-seeking, encouraging downward accountability to promote civic participation in decision-making. This will eventually alleviate poverty and reduce corruption. It is expected that where these goals are achieved, the level of human development index will rise in sub-Saharan Africa.
In spite of the hypothetical rationale for adopting decentralised policy, there are several scholars and academics that are pessimistic and cynical about the concept. Tulchin et al. (2004) for instance, argues that due to the complex and fluid nature of decentralisation, it is highly unlikely to determine the actual outcome against expectation. To qualify this statement, Wunsch (2008) writes that evidence of decentralisation across Africa over the years has been frustrating. However, some evidence suggests that there have been improvement in service delivery in certain countries within this region. Although Conyers (2007:27) caution that is it hard to ascertain whether decentralisation contributed to the progress.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Theories of decentralisation
Criticism of decentralisation
Decentralisation in sub-Saharan Africa
Independence and statism
Reforms in sub-Saharan Africa countries
Barriers to implementing successful decentralisation in sub-Saharan Africa
Has decentralisation reduced corruption?
Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This essay explores the impact of decentralisation policies on governance and corruption in sub-Saharan Africa, evaluating whether the expected benefits of devolved authority—such as improved service delivery and increased accountability—have materialised in the region since the 1990s.
- Theoretical frameworks of decentralisation and its intended benefits.
- The historical context and genealogy of decentralisation in sub-Saharan Africa.
- The role of administrative, political, and fiscal decentralisation in local governance.
- Barriers to effective policy implementation, including institutional weaknesses.
- An empirical analysis of the relationship between decentralised systems and the persistence of corruption.
Excerpt from the Book
Theories of decentralisation
Governments across the world in both the developed and developing countries have experienced a wave of policy reforms aimed at improving and expanding administrative, macroeconomic and political authority to local levels of governance. The dramatic shift in public policy reforms has been encouraged by the emergent of the concept of decentralisation in the early 1990s. The expectations of decentralisation vary greatly in theory to include a better governance system linked to economic growth and poverty reduction especially in third world countries.
Rondinelli (1981:133) refers to decentralisation as:
the transfer or delegation of legal and political authority to plan, make decisions and manage public functions from the central government and its agencies to field organizations of those agencies, subordinate units of government, semi-autonomous public corporations, area wide or regional development authorities; functional authorities, autonomous local governments, or nongovernmental organizations.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides the context for decentralisation reforms in sub-Saharan Africa and outlines the research objective to evaluate the effectiveness of these policies in fighting corruption.
Theories of decentralisation: Examines the conceptual foundations of decentralisation, highlighting the arguments from proponents regarding improved efficiency and accountability.
Criticism of decentralisation: Reviews opposing scholarly views that question the feasibility of achieving positive outcomes due to the complexity and local susceptibility to corruption.
Decentralisation in sub-Saharan Africa: Traces the history of administrative reforms from the colonial era through post-independence, noting the historical trend toward statism.
Independence and statism: Analyzes how post-independence governments in the region reverted to centralized control, leading to institutional instability and patrimonial management.
Reforms in sub-Saharan Africa countries: Discusses the introduction of modern decentralisation programmes since the 1990s as a response to persistent poverty and systemic corruption.
Barriers to implementing successful decentralisation in sub-Saharan Africa: Identifies critical obstacles such as institutional weakness, lack of capacity, and political market failure that impede reform progress.
Has decentralisation reduced corruption?: Investigates the empirical evidence of corruption in sub-Saharan Africa, suggesting that decentralisation has not yielded the expected reduction in illicit activities.
Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, concluding that while decentralisation is theoretically sound, its implementation in sub-Saharan Africa has been largely ineffective in curbing corruption or improving services.
Keywords
Decentralisation, sub-Saharan Africa, Good governance, Corruption, Accountability, Public service delivery, Administrative reform, Political stability, Rent-seeking, Institutional capacity, Local government, Devolution, Transparency, Third world development, Fiscal policy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this research?
The research examines the effectiveness of decentralisation as a policy instrument to promote good governance and reduce corruption in sub-Saharan African countries.
What are the core thematic areas discussed?
The work covers theoretical definitions of decentralisation, the historical evolution of governance in Africa, the barriers to effective policy implementation, and the correlation between decentralised structures and corruption.
What is the main objective of the study?
The objective is to determine whether the decentralisation policies adopted since the 1990s have successfully mitigated corruption and improved public service delivery in the region.
What research methodology is employed?
The work utilizes a review of existing academic literature, case studies from various African nations, and reports from international organizations such as the World Bank and Transparency International.
What is examined in the main section?
The main sections analyze the conflicting theoretical predictions regarding decentralisation, the historical shift between statism and local autonomy, and empirical evidence regarding corruption trends.
Which keywords best characterize the paper?
Key terms include decentralisation, sub-Saharan Africa, good governance, corruption, accountability, and institutional capacity.
How did colonial history influence current decentralisation efforts?
The paper discusses the "indirect rule" system and the subsequent return to centralized statism, which created institutional instability that complicates modern reform efforts.
What evidence is provided regarding the failure to reduce corruption?
The author cites regional surveys, reports from Transparency International, and instances of judicial and administrative misconduct to illustrate that corruption remains a major challenge despite decentralisation reforms.
- Quote paper
- Abu Bakarr Kaikai (Author), 2015, Corruption, Anti-corruption and its Discontents, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/342878
