Local Government PA 251

It CAN; but will it?

Can decentralization lead to effective local governance? Can it lead to poverty reduction?

There are numerous arguments towards the benefits of decentralization and in theory decentralization will lead to effective local governance resulting in the reduction and near elimination of poverty. One only needs to look at the world around them to see that the reality does not match with the theories. Due to the multi dimension of this question and for the ease of reading as well as the briefness of this paper it will be divided based on thought being presented

Definitions

To effectively begin to answer the question posed, it is necessary to define the elements of decentralization and effective. Decentralization has an abundance of definitions however all seems to be dependent on the concept that the definition changes to fit the time and place, that decentralization is a series of degrees along a spectrum(Katziaouni, 2003). From this Agrawal creates the idea that decentralization can be seen as an umbrella term that refers to multiple processes of relaxation of control by a central authority. I will use Agrawal's concept to base this analysis on. The other term in need of clarity is, effective, particularly in regards to local government. Local government can be denoted as effective if it's used to divide power by an area or territory, something that promotes liberty equity, welfare services or if is it a vehicle of local democracy providing services to local needs and conditions(Ilago, 2010) Agrawal argues that decentralization at its most basic aims to achieve democratization. I will bases my analysis of efficiency by the governments ability to increase democratization while providing services to local needs.

Local needs

Decentralization is a more efficient way of meeting local needs, it can cut through red tape and make government and administration more flexible, accountable and responsive by bringing government closer to the people. Decentralized governments are able to be open to collaborations with private institutions in a way that is not practical at a national level. Ultimately they are able to provide for local needs. The other side of this argument however is that decentralization programs fail. The cause of these failures are as diverse as the concept, including: a limited political will to pursue it, a lack of will to relinquish decision making authority, never really decentralizing, private businesses potential investment opportunities lost, administrative problems, delays in the payment of local government employees salaries, lack of cost recovery strategies over staffing underfunding, service delivered in insufficiently and potential low quality standards. (Bird, 1999. Ragragio, 2002. Agrawal, 2000.) The significant number of variables leading to success or failure reflects the idea that local needs can be more effectively met with local government however it is no guarantee they will.

Poverty

Decentralization has the potential to create dramatic changes in poverty. There are two different paths that this positive change may follow. First it is common knowledge that the greater the decentralization, the greater the ability to obtain better information. Poverty alleviation policies often require detailed and specific local knowledge which is most readily obtainable through a decentralized and locally accountable system of governance. This knowledge will reflect local and regional preferences, characteristics and needs. (Bird, 1999) Agrawal states that better information will lead to better decisions, causing poverty reduction. Second it that the private sector in business has a large stake in decentralization due to potential investment opportunities gained. Investment generates wealth in an area, creating a higher standard of living even among the poorest. This potential may not result in poverty reduction. The reasons for this include; The potential weak implementation by of administrations. A compromised or corrupt leader, it is quite common for local political elites to use the knowledge and investments to better themselves causing continued suppression on the poor. The potential that investments will not result in long term outputs necessary for poverty reduction. Finally, the reality that often as the poor improve they become more mobile and leave the area creating a void and continuing the poverty cycle.

There are an array of ways to understand the concepts of effective government and decentralization. Depending how one examines it decentralization can effective or ineffective and there remains the potential for change in poverty. My purpose in this essay was to raise some of the potentials as well as pitfalls in relying on decentralization as a way to create effective local governance and poverty reduction. The above paragraphs highlight that while decentralization can its not guarantee that it will.

Bibliography

Agrawal, A. The Politics of Decentralization- a Critical Review, WeltTrends Number 25 (Winter 1999/2000), pp. 53-75

Bird, R. and Rodriguez, E. Decentralization and Poverty Alleviation: International experience and the case of the Philippines. Public Administration and Development, Vol 19 pp 299-319

Ilago, Simeon A. “Overview of local government; structure; system”. PA 251. UP Diliman. 28 June 2010

Katziaouni, O. Decentralization and Poverty Reduction: Does it Work? Submitted at the Fifth Global Forum on Reinventing Government, Mexico City. November 2-7 2003.

Prud'homme, Remy. The Danger of Decentralization. The World Bank Research Observer. Vol.10, Number 2 (August 1995), pp 200 -226

Ragragio, J.M, Philippines: Ten Years of Decentralization and Challenger for the Next Decade. Asian Review of Public Administration, Vol 14, No.2 (2002), pp 15-34