Research Paper (postgraduate) from the year 2019 in the subject Economics - Monetary theory and policy, grade: B, Kenyatta University (Department of Entrepreneurship, Technology, Leadership and Management), course: Leadership and Governance, language: English, abstract: This study aims at analyzing the effect of decentralization frameworks on service delivery by devolved governments in Kenya. Devolution as a system of governance was introduced after the promulgation of the new constitution in 2010. Since then, both levels of governments have been working hard in order to implement all the new structures required for the operationalization of the new system. The statement of the problem shows that the process of implementation has faced many bottlenecks at the political, administrative and fiscal levels hence curtailing the speed of implementation and service delivery as detailed in the literature review. The research objectives have brought out the variables under the study as: to determine the effect of fiscal decentralization framework on service delivery by devolved governments in Kenya; to examine the effect of political decentralization framework on service delivery by devolved governments in Kenya; to investigate the effects of administrative decentralization framework on service delivery by devolved governments in Kenya, investigate the effects of economic decentralization framework on service delivery by devolved governments in Kenya to establish the moderating influence of regulatory frameworks on political, fiscal and administrative decentralization and service delivery in Kenya. The study will be undertaken in 14 counties covering all the main regions of Kenya. Several theories have been explored linked to the various variables considered under the study. These are: The Soufflé theory, The social capital theory, The principal Agent theory and finally the Accountability theory. The conceptual framework outlines the independent variables, as administrative, political and fiscal decentralization while the dependent variable is service delivery. The moderating variable is the regulatory framework. Data will be collected by the use of a questionnaire. The quantitative data will be captured with the help of a likert scale while the qualitative data will be captured with open- ended questions at the end of each variable. Data analysis will be done by both qualitative and quantitative methods, as both types of data will have been collected. Quantitative data will be analyzed by use of the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS).

Dissatisfied with centralized approaches to delivering local public services, a large number of countries are decentralizing responsibility for these services to lower-level, locally elected governments. The results have been mixed. The paper provides a framework for evaluating the benefits and costs, in terms of service delivery, of different approaches to decentralization, based on relationships of accountability between different actors in the delivery chain. Moving from a model of central provision to that of decentralization to local governments introduces a new relationship of accountability-between national and local policymakers-while altering existing relationships, such as that between citizens and elected politicians. Only by examining how these relationships change can we understand why decentralization can, and sometimes cannot, lead to better service delivery. In particular, the various instruments of decentralization-fiscal, administrative, regulatory, market, and financial-can affect the incentives facing service providers, even though they relate only to local policymakers. Likewise, and perhaps more significantly, the incentives facing local and national politicians can have a profound effect on the provision of local services. Finally, the process of implementing decentralization can be as important as the design of the system in influencing service delivery outcomes.

Fiscal decentralization is becoming a pressing issue in a number of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, reflecting demands for a greater local voice in spending decisions and efforts to strengthen social cohesion. Against this backdrop, this paper seeks to distill the lessons for an effective fiscal decentralization reform, focusing on the macroeconomic aspects. The main findings for sub-Saharan African countries that have decentralized, based on an empirical analysis and four case studies (Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda), are as follows: • Determinants and effectiveness: Empirical results suggest that (1) the major driving forces behind fiscal decentralization in sub-Saharan Africa include efforts to defuse ethnic conflicts, the initial level of income, and the urban-ization rate, whereas strength of democracy is not an important determi-nant for decentralization; and (2) decentralization in sub-Saharan Africa is associated with higher growth in the presence of stronger institutions. • Spending assignments: The allocation of spending across levels of gov-ernment in the four case studies is broadly consistent with best practice. However, in Uganda, unlike in the other three case studies, subnational governments have little flexibility to make spending decisions as a result of a deconcentrated rather than a devolved system of government. • Own revenue: The assignment of taxing powers is broadly in line with best practice in the four case studies, with the bulk of subnational revenue coming from property taxes and from fees for local services. However, own revenues are a very small fraction of subnational spending, reflecting weak cadaster systems and a high level of informality in the economy.

A Brookings Institution Press and Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation publication The trend toward greater decentralization of governance activities, now accepted as commonplace in the West, has become a worldwide movement. This international development—largely a product of globalization and democratization—is clearly one of the key factors reshaping economic, political, and social conditions throughout the world. Rather than the top-down, centralized decisionmaking that characterized communist economies and Third World dictatorships in the twentieth century, today's world demands flexibility, adaptability, and the autonomy to bring those qualities to bear. In this thought-provoking book, the first in a new series on Innovations in Governance, experts in government and public management trace the evolution and performance of decentralization concepts, from the transfer of authority within government to the sharing of power, authority, and responsibilities among broader governance institutions. This movement is not limited to national government—it also affects subnational governments, NGOs, private corporations, and even civil associations. The contributors assess the emerging concepts of decentralization (e.g., devolution, empowerment, capacity building, and democratic governance). They detail the factors driving the movement, including political changes such as the fall of the Iron Curtain and the ascendance of democracy; economic factors such as globalization and outsourcing; and technological advances (e.g. increased information technology and electronic commerce). Their analysis covers many different contexts and regions. For example, William Ascher of Claremont McKenna College chronicles how decentralization concepts are playing out in natural resources policy, while Kadmeil Wekwete (United Nations) outlines the specific challenges to decentralizing governance in sub-Saharan Africa. In each case, contributors explore the objectives of a decentralizing strategy as well as the benefits and difficulties that will likely result.

This paper explores the impact of fiscal decentralization on the efficiency of public service delivery. It uses a stochastic frontier method to estimate time-varying efficiency coefficients and analyzes the impact of fiscal decentralization on those efficiency coefficients. The findings indicate that fiscal decentralization can improve the efficiency of public service delivery but only under specific conditions. First, the decentralization process requires adequate political and institutional environments. Second, a sufficient degree of expenditure decentralization seems necessary to obtain favorable outcomes. Third, decentralization of expenditure needs to be accompanied by sufficient decentralization of revenue. Absent those conditions, fiscal decentralization can worsen the efficiency of public service delivery.

Nearly all countries worldwide are now experimenting with decentralization. Their motivation are diverse. Many countries are decentralizing because they believe this can help stimulate economic growth or reduce rural poverty, goals central government interventions have failed to achieve. Some countries see it as a way to strengthen civil society and deepen democracy. Some perceive it as a way to off-load expensive responsibilities onto lower level governments. Thus, decentralization is seen as a solution to many different kinds of problems. This report examines the origins and implications decentralization from a political economy perspective, with a focus on its promise and limitations. It explores why countries have often chosen not to decentralize, even when evidence suggests that doing so would be in the interests of the government. It seeks to explain why since the early 1980s many countries have undertaken some form of decentralization. This report also evaluates the evidence to understand where decentralization has considerable promise and where it does not. It identifies conditions needed for decentralization to succeed. It identifies the ways in which decentralization can promote rural development. And it names the goals which decentralization will probably not help achieve.

June 1995 Although decentralization initiatives have a long history, much more needs to be understood about various components of decentralization before sound advice can be given to policymakers. Special strategies are needed to address the widespread incidence of rural poverty in developing countries, but initiatives aimed at improving the rural standard of living have not consistently reduced poverty. Parker examines the rationale for a specific rural focus in poverty reduction programs and reviews recent attempts to encourage rural development. He discusses the role decentralization could play in rural development programs and analyzes recent efforts to implement decentralized rural development programs. Parker concludes that although decentralization initiatives have a long history, much more needs to be understood about various components of decentralization before sound advice can be given to policymakers. He suggests a conceptual model--based on a soufflé theory of decentralization--that incorporates the essential elements of political, fiscal, and institutional decentralization as they relate to rural development outcomes. Like a soufflé that requires just the right combination of milk, eggs, and heat to rise, a successful program of decentralization must include just the right combination of political, fiscal, and institutional elements to improve rural development outcomes. This paper--a product of the Sector Policy and Water Resources Division, Agriculture and Natural Resources Department--is part of a larger effort in the department to develop a new strategy for rural development. The study was partly funded by the Bank's Research Support Budget under the research project Decentralization, Fiscal Systems, and Rural Development (RPO 679-68).

Efficient delivery of public services in Africa and other developing regions has for a long time been hindered by highly centralized government bureaucracies (Mwabu et al., 2001). In Kenya, several efforts have been made to reduce unnecessary layers of government to make service provision to the populace more effective. This book reports on recent decentralization and devolution innovations in Kenya. The volume is organized into three parts and contains a total of 12 chapters including the introduction. The chapters in Part 1 (Structures and Institutions) provide a comprehensive analysis of institutional and organizational environment in which decentralization and devolution reforms have been taking place over the last three decades. Part 2 (Principles and Processes) contains chapters that clarify decentralization and devolution concepts, with applications to selected local authorities. The chapters in Part 3 (Service Delivery and Financing) illustrate advantages of provision and financing of services at the local level, with a focus on the role of community participation in improving accountability and efficiency in resource use.

In 2009, Ghana began pursuing the devolution of functions and responsibilities from the central government to the country’s 216 Metropolitan, Municipal, and District Assemblies (MMDAs). Agriculture was among one of the first sectors to be devolved, a process that became effective in 2012. This paper analyzes how this transition has proceeded, with a focus on the implications for agricultural civil servants within the MMDAs, accountability to citizens, and agricultural expenditures. Empirically, the paper draws on a survey of 960 rural households, 80 District Directors of Agriculture (DDAs), district level budget data from 2012 to 2016, and semi-structured interviews with a range of national and local government stakeholders.