Decentralization : improving governance in sub-Saharan Africa -- synthesis report

In all three countries, the LGUs observed are predominantly bureaucratic structures designed by their central governments without regard to local conditions, capabilities, and interests. They survive through central funding and by responding to central administrative demands rather than by meeting local demands for public services. The study found that decentralization and structural adjustment have not significantly curtailed central government influence. While LGUs have substantially enhanced authority to undertake many of the new tasks assigned them, their operational capabilities are limited by restricted access to tax instruments and by regulations imposed by national governments that increase the cost of service delivery. Decentralization (as currently instituted) and structural adjustment programs, singly or in tandem, seem not to have prompted people to increase investments in productive activities; stagnation, rather than noticeable economic growth, characterizes rural areas. Moreover, while citizens are better able to hold locally elected officials accountable for delivering quality public services than before decentralization, office), these same officials are constrained in what they can do by central government regulations. For the future, national governments should further relinquish control over local tax instruments, and local governments should be authorized and encouraged to reduce overhead (as opposed to operating) costs and to identify and support local self-governing service institutions. Communities should be encouraged to improve their problem-solving capabilities and form special service provision districts.