Uganda’s ongoing experiment in devolution aims to shift responsibility for public services from central to local government. While progress has been made, new research argues that success depends on the adequacy of resources to support the task and the capacities of local authorities to carry it out.

Research published in the journal Public Administration and Development evaluates the prospects of Uganda’s devolution policy in meeting the expectations of government and the wider community. Central to Uganda’s public sector reform programme, the devolution programme receives substantial donor support.

While decentralisation involves the shifting of implementation rather than power away from the centre, devolution goes further and involves the downwards transfer of full responsibility for the provision and delivery of public services to the lowest level of governance capable of these tasks. In Uganda, this is the local authority District Council.

The research argues that successful devolution will be determined by the ability and desire of central government to ensure that local authorities have access to at least the same levels of resources as the previous service providers. Of equal importance is the capacity and ability of local government staff to meet the challenge. Local government professionals might lack the required experience and competence, while elected members might not possess the necessary political skills, probity and integrity.

Although encouraged by progress to date, the research warns that:

• local revenue-raising through taxation will not generate adequate funds by itself and must be accompanied by the transfer of financial resources, staff and assets from central government
• devolution is precariously donor-dependent: if donor flows diminished, the entire devolution process could be seriously undermined
• funds and decision-making would shift back to the centre if the donors moved from a project-based to a budget-support approach
• development of a single financial management and budgeting system across central and local government, and the greater transparency of financial data, are required if the government’s Results Orientated Management system is to work effectively
• central inertia continues to obstruct change as bureaucracies prove unwilling to ‘let go’.

Still in its infancy, devolution in Uganda requires further changes to ensure success. These include:

• weeding out of statutes enacted under previous highly centralised systems that are incompatible with the principles of decentralisation
• financial management systems to move away from the customary input-biased system and to refocus on outputs
• streamlining of procedures so as to minimise the workload of local authorities in liaising with donors
• review of the uncompetitive local government salaries and conditions of service (poor in comparison with the public service) which contribute to recruitment and retention problems
• care is needed to ensure that supervision of local authorities is not so unremitting that they become mere delivery agents for government and the spirit of devolution is lost.

Prospects for Uganda’s devolution programme look encouraging provided donor support continues and local authorities gain the necessary experience and self-confidence.

Source(s):
‘Devolution in Uganda: an experiment in local service delivery’ by Robin Mitchinson, Public Administration and Development, 23, pp 241–248, 2003 Full document.

id21 Research Highlight: 1 March 2004

Further Information:
Robin Mitchinson
Bay Tree Cottage
Glen Auldyn
Lezayre Ramsey IM7 2AQ
Isle of Man
UK

Tel: +44 (0) 1624 812355
Contact the contributor: cavok@glovers34.freeserve.co.uk

Other related links:
'Decentralisation in Bolivia: a success story for the poor'

'Decentralisation and poverty reduction: the reality in Africa'

'Measuring pro-poorness: does decentralisation help the poor?'

'Central reservation? Drawbacks of healthcare decentralisation in China'