Research support services
Question
Decentralization is one of the essential institutional reforms achieved in developing countries as one of the new public management approaches to improve service delivery and is considered to contribute to Uganda’s democratization more efficient and effective service delivery , good governance and development.
Critically analyze as a student who is undertaking public administration and management at UMI and also drawing from your managerial experience on Uganda’s decentralization, critically analyze the above statement giving clear examples.
Definition of decentralization,
Decentralization refers to the transfer of responsibility for planning. management, resource raising and-allocation, and other functions from the central government and its agencies to field units of central government ministries or agencies, Subordinate units or levels of government, semi-autonomous public authorities or corporations, or nongovernmental or voluntary organizations,( Ehtisham, 2000).
According to Bigler, (2004), Decentralization is transforming the structure of governance among countries in the sub-Saharan Africa, Since the middle of the l980s most African countries have started a transfer of power, resources and responsibilities to their sub national governments showing a fasters pace of transformation, this pace differs among countries, Some countries -namely, Ethiopia, South Africa and Uganda are proceeding fast. A number of countries have just started the process and are presently creating new units and/or transferring responsibilities and revenues to them. A large group has only adopted legal texts that engage the central government to proceed towards a more decentralized system.
Africa shows an impressive institutional creativity. Two countries, Ethiopia and South Africa, have chosen a federal, or quasi-federal system. Nigeria, which used to be the only federal state in Africa, has adopted a new constitution that maintains the federal framework and gives more powers to its subnational governments. A number of countries on the east and the west of the continent have chosen a multi-layered system. More specifically, an intermediate layer has been inserted between the central and the local government. In other countries, decentralization means strengthening existing local government units in the urban areas and the creation of new units in the rural areas. This amounts to the revitalization of the two-tiered system that prevailed in these countries in the immediate aftermath of independence. In general, rural areas are receiving priority over the urban ones in the current decentralizing trends in African continent.
Most governments in Africa and some proponents of decentralization in developing countries share the view that local government may be a major vehicle for specific poverty alleviation policies, such as the distribution of basic food to the poorest segments of the population or the implementation of growth-inducing policies, through the mobilization of local resources and increased participation.
Furthermore, the view is becoming increasingly popular, particularly among donors, whereby the responsibility for these policies should be assigned to very small local governments or to informal communities to avoid the risk, which is substantial where democratic institutions are fragile, of capture by vested interests.
According to Stacey White (2011), Service delivery is a contemporary issue for most governments and researchers alike. Most scholars are in agreement that public service delivery is critical to ensuring the national welfare and stimulation of economic development. This is because often governments undertake a number of activities to provide citizens with services and at the same time guarantee that these services are provided in accordance with the service delivery requirements within the rule of law. The provision of health services by the government is essential in ensuring the citizens of Uganda have quality life and this can be achieved by decentralization process in Uganda.
In Uganda Service delivery principles have been developed in line with the mandate of the Ministry of Local Government. The Ministry develops sector policies, coordinates, monitors, guides, supervises, mentors and supports local governments in implementation of decentralized services. Finally, in a few countries decentralization is still at the stage of the announcement of the policy
The decentralization policy in Uganda is guided by the Constitution, the Local Government Act (cap 243), the Decentralization Policy Strategic Framework (DPSF), the Fiscal Decentralization Strategy (FDS), the Local Government Sector Strategic Plan (LGSSP), the Public Sector Management Strategic Investment Plan (PSM-SIP) and the National Development Plan (NDP). PSM-SIP outlines strategic coordination and investment in key strategic sectors of government. The Office of the Prime Minster (OPM) coordinates the sectors. Strategic public sectors under PSM-SIP include: Ministry of Local Government, Local Government Associations, Local Government Finance Commission, Ministry of Public Service, Public Service Commission, and Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA). PSM-SIP recognizes that in local governments “Public service delivery challenges are currently very serious”.
It points at key decentralization challenges including: a high rate of district creation, lack of implementation capacity, understaffing, revenue shortfalls, waste and corruption, poor funding, and low local revenue generation. On its part, the NDP calls for streamlining of the planning processes and harmonization of service delivery sectors.
The Ugandan decentralization reform initiated in 1992 is exceptional among developing countries in terms of the scale and scope of the transfer of power and responsibilities to the local level.
According to Onyach- Olaa (2007), Uganda’s democracy has been as one of the most far-reaching local government reform programs in the developing world; this is because Uganda’s decentralized system is more participatory than for most of the other countries in sub-Saharan Africa.
Political, Administrative, and Fiscal Elements of Decentralization
The current decentralization reform was officially launched in October 1992 through a presidential policy statement. It was first enshrined in the Local Government (Resistance Councils) Statute of 1993 and later in the Constitution of 1995 and the Local Governments Act of 1997. The local government system is formed by a five-tier pyramidal structure, which consists of the village (LC1), parish (LC2), sub-county (LC3), county (LC4), and district (LC5) in rural areas, and the village (LC1), ward or parish (LC2), municipal division, town, or city division (LC3), municipality (LC4), and city (LC5) in urban areas. The district and the city are the highest local government levels, while the sub-county, municipality, municipal division, town, and city division are referred to as lower local government levels, (MoLG, 2013).
The political organ at all local levels is the council, whose members are elected in regular elections. Councilors either represent specific electoral areas or interest groups, namely women, youth, and disabled persons. In past elections, voter turnout appears to have been relatively high, Steffensen et al. (2004) report that turnout was 47 percent in local elections in 2001, and Azfar et al. (2001) state that 80 percent of the households interviewed by them voted in local elections.8 The administrative organs of both higher and lower local governments comprise of administrative officers and technical planning committees who are respectively in charge of accounting and coordination as well as monitoring of the implementation of sectoral plans.
Decentralization in Uganda is meant with numerous challenges since there is mainly high levels of corruption in local governments , this was specifically discovered by the 2003 NIS in Uganda which ranked the local governments in fourth position among the leading public institutions in proliferating corruption and abuse office, just behind the Uganda Police, Uganda Revenue Authority, and Magistrate’s Courts. According to the survey findings, low salaries and delay in their payment were the main causes of corruption, coupled with the need for politicians to recoup election expenses when they get into power, and profiteering by some from situations of confusion. The survey also established a prevailing climate of tolerance towards corruption, reinforced by an attitude of sympathy towards those who augment meagre wages with small bribes, and those who see misuse of official resources such as vehicles for private purposes as a norm rather than a breach of regulations (NIS, 2003), high levels of corruption was also observed in the Mukono district as reported by Daily monitor, Saturday August 8 2015 in which the, The councilors dragged the district to court, discovered that the LC5 boss and his executive had earmarked Shs300m for entertainment in the budget on top of awarding the contract to build the outpatient department at Seeta-Nazigo Health Centre III to two different contractors.
Other cases of corruption which has been brought about due to decentralization in Uganda include, In a court case (Uganda vs Balinda) where the accused, an agent of Kampala City Council (KCC) was contracted to collect rates, he solicited and received a bribe of Shs 500,000/= corruptly. He was convicted and sentenced to one and a half years in prison or pay a fine of Shs 30,000/= (approx. US $18). He paid the fine and walked home (IG-Report, 2007: 62). Another case (Uganda vs Tabaruka James) involved a public officer who was charged and convicted of corruption and abuse of office for soliciting and receiving a bribe of Shs 2,000,000/= in order to release a local purchasing order (LPO).
Decentralization has been important in the health sector however Health care situations in Uganda has been alarming though over the past decades the government has focused on expanding its health infrastructure through construction of more health facilities in an effort to bring health services closer to the people. However, a number of these health facilities are neither manned with the right cadre of health workers nor adequately equipped. (National development plan, 2010). According to Uganda Service Provision Assessment Survey (USPSS), 2007, access to and quality of reproductive health services in Uganda does not yet meet the expected standards especially in rural areas. Overall, only 46% of health facilities in Uganda offer full range of basic reproductive health services. However 51% of the government facilities offer the full range of reproductive health services as compared to 32% of private health facilities. The majority of the government health facilities that offer the full range of reproductive health services are however located in urban areas.
According to Dokolo District statistical abstract (2008/09),access to health services still remains poor in the district as a whole for instance, over 42% of the population still move distance of more than 5Km in search of health services because there is only one health centre IV, four health centre III and 8 health centre II which the authority explained to be as a result of poverty, poor perception by the population, poor method of communication and inadequate manpower within the health sector.
Decentralization has caused poor accountability among districts in Uganda , this has caused loss of taxpayers money in unknown way. The three poor and rural districts of Kasese, Kabarole and Kyenjojo alone had failed to account for over shillings 10 billion from 2000/2001 to 2005/2006 financial years, according to an official from the OAG. Kasese district failed to account for Shs5.2 billion followed by Kabarole with Shs3.1billion and Kyenjojo with Shs1.9 billion, which money included unaccounted for or un-recovered advances and other questionable expenditures (The Daily Monitor, 2007: 8). According to the OAG official, the figure would be higher if other financial irregularities like excess expenditure, diverted deposits, un-authorised transfers and under performance, were all to be considered. “If we go by this trend, over Shs. 300 billion would have been misused in the whole country,” the OAG official said (The Daily Monitor, 2007: 8).
There has also been increase misuse of government resources by public officials in various towans and districts, this was practically evidenced in the case of the Chairman of Njeru Town, Mukono District was found to have misused his office for self-enrichment; was in conflict of interest and practiced favouritism and nepotism. He had interests in a company that was awarded a tender to supply assorted items; did not declare his interests in another family company in which he was a director, shareholder and signatory to the account, and was awarded a tender of refuse collection and disposal; all of which contravened the Leadership Code Act (2002: s.15 [1]; 8[1-2]; and 12[1]). The IG directed the chairman to vacate office, and was not eligible to hold any public office (elective or appointive) for a period of five years in accordance with the Constitution (2005: Art.235) and the Leadership Code Act (2002: s. 20[3]).
Can lead to greater inequity in the distribution of resources And services if decentralized units are not concerned about Equitable distribution, in the decentralization process the resources are sometimes distributed unequally which causes discontent with in the citizen population in a country like Uganda, some of the district are more developed than others , while other districts like Arua have developed faster than other districts like Kumi.
Lack of financial resources and management skills at local level May lead to inefficient or ineffective service delivery, this is mainly due to expensive nature of maintaining highly expensive workforce in the rural areas , this may hinder effectiveness of decentralization in such rural areas, this has been observed by the fact that most of the key needs like water are not available in decentralized local towns in the different towns as stated that the World Bank’s Water and Sanitation Programme (WSP), by the end of 2006, Uganda required USD $242 million annually for the next ten years to achieve its Millennium Development Goal targets as compared to the current budget of approximately 150 billion Uganda shillings (at the exchange rate of UGX 1860 to USD.1) Breaking down the overall figure into water and sanitation requirements, WSP calculates that USD $95 million is needed for water supply and USD $147 million for sanitation, with the largest share required by rural areas, this has increased on government expenditure and made the government to rely somuch on borrowing.
Corruption with the local government system, according to transparency international Uganda is one of the most corrupt countries in the world, this high levels of corruption renders a big challenges to decentralized system of governance adopted by the government of Uganda.
However decentralization has been so beneficial TO the government because of improvement in service delivery in Uganda for example specifically in Educational areas like the increase on enrolment rates in schools this can be specifically observed in the district of Bundibugyo , according to Bategeka et al., (2004) who states that, the introduction of UPE accompanied by government commitment, including political leadership resulted into a surge in primary school enrolment from 2.7 million pupils in 1996 to 5.3 million in 1997 and to 7.1 million in 2005. The ever increasing primary school enrolment has consequently led to improvements in gross enrollment ratio (GER). Whereas GER in the decade preceding 1997 had increased by only 39%, by 2004 GER had risen by 104.42% .
Decentralization of health services delivery has improved on implementation of various health programmes all over the country for example the immunization programmes shows a remarkable success through decentralization for example in Bushenyi Districts, the services coverage of immunization was 80 per cent. This was because of involvement and participation of local leaders in mobilizing people to take children for immunization (Nsimbambi 1998)
Decentralization of governance has also promoted the improvement of health infrastructures. When user fees for government health facilities were established in 2001 (except for private facilities in hospitals), the health system was recognized into a hierarchy that mirror government structures (Okidi and Gulaba, 2006). The system now comprise national and regional referral hospitals and health centers categorized as level IV, III, II, or I depending on the range of services offered at a given facility level.
Decentralization helps in cutting through red-tape and highly bureaucratic procedures, in the centralized system of governance there is high level of bureaucracy since the lower levels of management have to first consult before they are given the power to carry on with an activity.
Strengthening service delivery is a key strategy to achieve the sustainable development Goals, This includes the delivery of interventions to reduce child mortality, maternal mortality, and the burden to HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria generally decentralization is key in achieving a quality health system in a country. Service provision or delivery is an immediate output of the inputs into the health system, such as health workforce, procurement and supplies and finances. Increased inputs should lead to improved service delivery and enhanced access to services. Ensuring availability and access to health services is one of the main functions of a health system, Such services should meet a minimum quality standard, which can be met possibly with minimum costs in a decentralized.
In a decentralized system the officials are empowered to make decision, this benefits an organization or the society because the people who make decisions they are the first hand people who feel the economic effects of the systems within.
Key Recommendation
The findings have showed that decentralization is beneficial for a country like since it helps in in many ways which include.
Decentralization helps in increasing on the number of enrollment among pupils in primary schools, also helps in creating efficiency in service delivery in key areas which are crucial for economic development like roads, health and communication.
However the findings have showed that despite numerous advantages of decentralization the systems is meant with numerous challenges in a country like Uganda which include; corrucption among the local leaders, increased government expenditure and misuse of government resources by the local leaders.
REFERENCES
Ahmad, Ehtisham and Krelove, Russell “Tax Assignments: Options for Indonesia”, paper presented at the seminar on “Agenda for Sequencing Decentralization in Indonesia”, March 20–21, 2000, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Akin, J., Hutchinson, P. and Strumpf, K., 2001, ‘Decentralisation and Government Provision of Public Goods: The Public Health Sector in Uganda’, in Abt. Associates: MEASURE Evaluation Project Working Paper 01–35, Bethesda, MD.
Andersen, K. K., Azuma, N., Barnola, J. M., Bigler, M., Biscaye, P., Caillon, N., … & Flückiger, J. (2004). High-resolution record of Northern Hemisphere climate extending into the last interglacial period. Nature, 431(7005), 147-151.
Bardhan, Pranab, Mookherjee Dilip, “Expenditure Decentralization and the Delivery of Public Services in Developing Countries”, Department of Economics, University of California Berkeley, W.P. No. C98-104, December 1998.
Bitarabeho, J. (2008). “The experience of Uganda- local government’s role as a partner in the Decentralization process to strengthen local development”. Conference on Access to Development Funding for Local Governments in Africa. Johannesburg
DokoloDistrictStatisticalAbstract2009.(www.ubos.org/onlinefiles/uploads/ubos/2009_HLG…/Dokolo.pdf)
Fiszbein, Ariel 1997 “The emergence of local capacity; lessons from Colombia”, World Development, Vol. 25, and No.7:1029-1043.
Hughes, L. G., Van Voorhis, R., Miyazaki, A., Markusic, C. A., Mampe, C., Sugama, T., & Cardimen, P. J. (2012). U.S. Patent No. 8,172,311. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
IMF, Uganda achieves impressive results in reforming public service sector . IMF Survey, May 25, 1998.
Ministry of Health (2009b), National health policy: promoting people’s health to enhance socio-economic development, Kampala, Uganda.
Ndegwa, S. N. (2002). “Decentralization in Africa: A Stocktaking Survey”, Africa Region Working Paper Series No. 40.
Onyach- Olaa (2007), The success and challenges of decentralization in Uganda. A paper presented at a Rural Development Workshop, Kampala Uganda.
Scrimgeour M & Scrimgeour D 2008. Health care access for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in urban areas, and related research issues: a review of the literature. CRCAH discussion paper no. 5. Darwin: Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health. Viewed 11 January 2013, <www.lowitja.org.au/ lowitja-publishing/C005>.
Stacey White (2011), Government decentralization in the 21st century: A literature Review, Center for strategic and international studies, 1800 KStreet, NW, Washington, DC20006.
Uganda, Constitution of the Republic of Uganda
Uganda, Ministry of Local Government, Decentralization Policy Strategic Framework, (2004)
Uganda, Ministry of Local Government, Local Government Sector Investment Plan, (2013)
Uganda, Ministry of Local Government, Local Governments Act. Cap 243, (1997)
Uganda, National Planning Authority, National Development Plan 2010/2011 –2014/2015, (2010).
Watson J, Obersteller EA, Rennie L & Whitbread C 2001. Diabetic foot care: developing culturally appropriate educational tools for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the Northern Territory, Australia. Australian Journal of Rural Health 9(3):121–6.
www. daily monitor,.co.ug.
