Decentralization and Service Delivery

1. Decentralization and Service Delivery Regina Birner Research Program Governance for Agricultural and Rural Development

2. Background • Decentralization worldwide • Major policy trend • Recent focus on democratic decentralization • High hopes: Bringing government closer to the people! • More voice and accountability • Better service delivery • Priorities, access, quality of service • Mixed empirical evidence worldwide • Decentralization does not necessarily reduce poverty. • Capacity and coordination problems at the local level • Problems of local elite capture • Decentralizing governance problems

3. Challenges of decentralization He participates, she participates, you participate, …. I decide.

4. Uganda is the second most decentralized country in Africa. Decentralization in Africa Extent of political, administrative and fiscal decentralization (Score from 0 to 4) Ndegwa (2002), World Bank

5. Strategic Policy Questions • Questions identified in stakeholder consultations • How can decentralization be made more pro-poor? • How can service delivery be made more effective and efficient? • How can its access and utilization by the poor be improved? • Goals of the Presentation • Suggestions for research approach • Review some available evidence • Discuss research priorities

6. Types of Public Services • Public Services for Pro-poor Growth and Empowerment • Education • Health • Water and Sanitation • Agriculture • Transport • Administrative Institutions/Courts (Governance) • Data Sources • National Services Delivery Surveys in 2004 and 2000 • Community Surveillance 1996 (9 Districts)

7. Research Questions • Analyzing the empirical evidence • Access and quality • To which extent do the poor have access to public services – as compared to the non-poor? • What is the quality of the services to which the poor have access – as compared to the non-poor? • Efficiency • How efficient is the provision of services? • Resources spent in relation to outputs achieved • Which role does decentralization play for access, quality and efficiency of service delivery? • Explaining changes over time • Explaining variation across districts

8. Measures to improve voice and accountability(e.g., participatory planning) Other factors Demand-side Ability of the poor to demand and supervise services Political decentralization OutcomesPro-poor development, Sustainability Capacity of state agencies/other organizations to finance and provide services Fiscal and administrative decentralization Supply-side Measures to improve capacity of service provision(e.g, training, competition) Factors Influencing Service Provision Provision of public services; Implementation of projects * Priorities,* outreach, * quality,* efficiency

9. Insights from National Service Delivery Survey (2004) • Role of different levels of government • Priorities • Access • Perceived quality

10. Responsibility for Project Implementation

11. PrioritiesProjects considered most important

12. Target time Water collection time (minutes)

13. Target Access to SchoolsPercent distribution of pupils by distance to school

14. Need for reform Perceived level of benefits for different types of projects

15. Policy reform options • Strategies to make decentralization more effective and more pro-poor • Example: Agricultural Extension Reform • National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) • Key objectives • Empowering farmers, targeting the poor, • mainstreaming gender issues, and • deepening decentralization • Design • Farmers’ groups contract service providers (including NGOs) • District-level coordinates with sub-county and local community level to manage contracts

16. Other factors Ability of the poor to demand and supervise services Political decentralization OutcomesPro-poor development, Sustainability Capacity of state agencies/other organizations to finance and provide services Fiscal and administrative decentralization Supply side: Create incentives/competition among service providers NAADS: Institutional reforms Demand side: Involve farmers’ organizations in decision-making Measures to improve voice and accountability(e.g., participatory planning) Provision of public services; Implementation of projects and programs* Priorities,* outreach, * quality,* efficiency Measures to improve capacity of service provision(e.g, training, competition)

17. How effective is the reform of the agricultural extension system? • Study on “Quantifying the Impact of the National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) on Rural Livelihoods” • by Samuel Benin, Ephraim Nkonya, Gerosom Okecho, John Pender, Samuel Mugarura, Edward Kato • Objectives • To quantify the initial impacts of NAADS • in the districts and sub-counties where the program was operating by 2002/03 • To provide a baseline for future impact evaluation studies • Methods • Survey of 116 farmer groups and 894 farmersin • 6 “trailblazing NAADS Districts” (introduced in 2001/02),4 “late NAADS Districts” (2002/03) and 4 “non-NAADs Districts”

18. NAADS was effective in reducing income losses Percent change in household income between 2000 and 2004

19. Some Policy Implicationsderived from the NAADS study • Enterprise targeting • Need to identify farm enterprises that are profitable and can be adopted by a large number of farmers • Identifying constraints to adoption • Credit, input supplies, marketing • Promoting sustainable natural resource management • Adoption of improved seeds without soil fertility management may lead to nutrient mining. • Taking care of remote areas • NGOs – as an important service provider – less active in areas with low market access

20. Proposed research issues - Summary • Analyzing existing data on service delivery with regard to • Access and quality by poor versus non-poor groups • Analyzing variation among districts and changes over time • Estimating efficiency in service provision • Linking service provision data with expenditure data • Evaluating the impact of policy strategies that aim at • increasing voice & accountability (demand-side) • improving capacity for service delivery (supply side) • Example: NAADS; Analysis of reforms in other sectors possible • Issues • Role of the public sector, private sector and civil society (NGOs, farmers’ associations) in service delivery • Costs and benefits of different reform options • Conditions that influence success of reforms

21. Thank you! Looking forward to your suggestions and comments…

22. Range of possible governance structures: Example Extension

23. Framework for Analyzing Service Delivery Fit Example: Agricultural Extenion Common framework for ISNAR/EPTD/DSGD

24. Explaining Performance • Compare Lynn et al.: Governance perspective on the public administration • P = f [G, M, A, E, C, F] • where • P = Performance • G = Governance structures (degree of decentralization, functional differentiation) • M = Organization and management (incentives, leadership style, organizational culture) • A = Advisory techniques used (e.g., individual or group extension) • E = General political environment (general support to agriculture) • C = General capacity of potential service providers (public, private, third sector; quality of information provided to extension system from research) • F = Characteristics of the farming systems and the clients (complexity of farming systems, education level of clients, collective action among clients)

25. Contracting out to private sector, supervision by farmers‘ organization Provision by state agency Effect of low capacity of the agency Higher costs of setting up collaborative systems c2 c1 Analyzing “fit” of institutions with frame conditions Total costsTransaction costs + other costs Reduced transaction costs due to monitoring by recipients 0 • Attributes of the transaction • Measurability • “Care intensity” “Efficient Boundaries” of the State

26. B A F Building state capacity C Expansion of functions “Neo-patrimonial downward spiral”1960s-1980s Addressing market failures E D Structural adjustment 1980s/1990s Strength versus Scope of the State Strengthof state(Capacity) Scope of the state(Range of functions) Fukuyama, 2001