1 / 8

OECD Decentralisation and Poverty Workshop

OECD Decentralisation and Poverty Workshop. Reviewing the Sub-Saharan African Experience Nick Devas International Development Department University of Birmingham. Decentralisation: a necessary but not sufficient condition for poverty reduction. Poor people are “out there”

kesia
Télécharger la présentation

OECD Decentralisation and Poverty Workshop

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OECD Decentralisation and Poverty Workshop Reviewing the Sub-Saharan African Experience Nick Devas International Development Department University of Birmingham

  2. Decentralisation: a necessary but not sufficient condition for poverty reduction • Poor people are “out there” • So not whether but how to decentralise • But many unrealistic assumptions • Cross-country analyses come to conflicting conclusions due to: • differing factors considered • inadequacy of data • decentralisation being recent and evolving • Need to examine mechanisms in detail

  3. Mechanisms: Political (Voice) • Accountability of elected representatives and executive to the poor • Pro-poor programmatic political parties • Responsive and responsible civic leadership • Inclusion, exclusion, elite domination, corruption • Formal & informal political processes • Mechanisms of citizen participation • Access to information • Capacity (& representativeness) of civil society • Accessible, community level local government

  4. Mechanisms: Economic • Does LG have the functions which address poverty? • Capacity of LGs to deliver services • Financial resources • Information (about the poor, about services) • Distributional arrangements: access, targeting, pricing • Impact of regulatory activities • Leadership and motivation

  5. Ghana Case Issues identified in study of Kumasi (2000): • Disempowering role of appointed MCE • Low electoral turnout • Failure to operationalise lower tier units • Unresolved transfers of key functions • Resource flows: Common Fund plus central payment of key staff: ownership issue • Little attempt to address poverty • Repression of informal sector • Weak civil society • Countervailing power of traditional authorities

  6. Guinea Case From case presented, there appears to be: • No real connection between decentralisation and poverty reduction • Ambivalence of leadership to both • Proximity of decision-making provides some opportunities for voice and accountability • But domination of old elites, limited accountability, weak civil society

  7. Uganda • Extensive decentralisation of functions & resources • Multiple levels provide opportunities for participation • But high degree of central control through conditional transfers • Weak local capacity and management • Building local accountability through participation & information but still v.weak • Poverty addressed mainly through central transfers, eg LGDP

  8. Kenya • LG reform rather than decentralisation • Limited political commitment to either decentralisation or poverty reduction • Weak local accountability • Weak local capacity and resources • Opportunistic behaviour of councillors • Control and interference from centre • But new transfer system aims at improved participation, accountability & service delivery through performance conditions • Growing civil society pressure

More Related