Decentralization: Insights from International Experience

Realizing the Promise of
Decentralization
Insights from international experience, & the
economics of incentives
Stuti Khemani
Development Research Group & Africa Chief Economist Office, The World Bank
Presentation at the Zambia National Decentralization Conference, March 26, 2024
Outline
1.
What do we know from voluminous research on decentralization (and re-
centralization) policies across the world?
2.
Why is the experience of local government in China important to learn
from…and yet, not directly replicable in different contexts?
3.
What are we learning from current policy advances in Africa, especially
Zambia?
4.
What are the concrete implications for the design of decentralization policies
going forward?
What
decentralization
looks like
From voluminous research over
decades:
Fiscal
 
decentralization is very
limited, especially in Africa and
South Asia
Political
 decentralization—in the
form of competitive elections for
leadership positions in local
government—has taken hold
Fiscal decentralization limited
General reluctance among national leaders to decentralize actual control over
fiscal resources
Tightly controlled central grants to hundreds of rural, community-based
jurisdictions, with no/little own-revenue bases
Fragmentation/multiplication of grants-dependent rural local governments
Too little decentralization to urban centers (e.g. in India, vs. China), which would
actually have the potential for generating own-revenues from local tax bases (e.g.
property)
Latin America more advanced: municipal governments financed with own-source
revenues, and systematic fiscal transfers with effectively decentralized control
Constituency Development Funds?
Not many countries have them
Because CDFs are allocated to 
national
 member of parliament’s (MP’s) electoral
constituencies, rather than 
locally elected 
executive
 government,
not examined in research literature as part of decentralization, 
per se
Research literature focuses on CDFs’ role in shaping incentives and accountability
of MPs
Lessons from one of the first CDFs, in India, established in 1993 (Keefer and
Khemani, 2010)
Another strand is examining Zambia’s CDF as a “CDD” (community-driven-
development) program (Casey et al IGC policy paper, 2021)
E.g. India’s MPLADS
Each MP, elected from single-member constituencies, allocated >.5million$ per
annum, to spend on local public infrastructure (e.g. roads, bridges, school
buildings, water bodies, sanitation facilities, etc.)
What is not spent can be accumulated into the next year for the constituency, even
if the MP changes due to fresh elections
Similar institutions (as Zambia’s) for community participation in local development
plans
Implementation via local governments: MPLADS is simply added-on to other work
already happening on decentralized service delivery, national policy
implementation, and local planning for local economic development
E.g. India’s MPLADS
Very low rates of utilization in early years
of program shows how difficult it is to
either spend/or capture the funds
(capture is not easy, even in weak
institutional contexts!)
Increase in utilization over time, and
evidence on MPs’ incentives (
Keefer and
Khemani, 2009
; Blair, 2017), consistent
with the program making MPs more
accountable for constituency service
Citizen engagement at local level is
happening regardless of the CDF
program: citizens were already engaging
in local government even in the absence
of the CDF
Political decentralization has taken hold
Competitive elections for leadership positions in local governments
Very high rates of citizen engagement as voters, but perhaps even
more importantly, as contenders for leadership positions
P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
 
i
n
 
l
o
c
a
l
 
e
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
:
 
a
s
 
v
o
t
e
r
s
Source: World Values Survey: Wave 6, question V226; Wave 7,
question Q221
Zambia
 
(Afrobarometer 2021/2023): 
75%
report voting in 2021 national elections (question
not asked separately for local elections)
P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n
 
i
n
 
l
o
c
a
l
 
e
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
:
 
a
s
 
l
e
a
d
e
r
s
h
i
p
 
c
o
n
t
e
n
d
e
r
s
Evidence from micro-empirical
research across a diverse range of
countries
Brazil: Ferraz, Finan and Martinez-
Bravo (2020)
Pakistan: Gulzar and Khan (2021)
Indonesia: case study from
Berenschot et al (2021)
India (Bihar): Khemani, Chaudhury
and Scot (2020)
Uganda: Eg. Habyarimana, Khemani
and Scot (2018)
Despite widespread malpractices in elections…
% respondents answering "Very Often" or "Fairly Often"
Source: World Values Survey wave 7 (2021) MENA module
…Belief in importance of 
honest 
elections
Source: World Values Survey, Wave 7 (2017-2020), Q234
(how important is having honest elections) and Q76 (how
much confidence do you have in elections)
Zambia
 
(Afrobarometer 2021/2023): 
83%
 agree
with elections as method of choosing leaders, even
though there are “problems”
Lessons from international experience?
Impact of greater devolution of public spending resources on public service
delivery, infrastructure, and economic outcomes?
Any country that decentralises should expect not one tidy outcome replicated
in many localities, but rather a wide variety of outcomes that range from the
strongly negative, through the null (“no change”), all the way to highly positive
responses.”
 (Faguet, 2024)
Lessons?: China
Dramatic economic transformation of China rooted in economic
entrepreneurship and infrastructure investments by local government
officials
 Evidence in Ang (2018): 
How China Escaped the Poverty Trap
 Comparison of Chinese versus Indian experience by Mookherjee (2021): 
Tale
of Two Asian Tigers
 
fiscal powers of city governments in China (versus 
lack 
of such powers in
India) is the key difference
Lessons?: history of UK and US
Political and Fiscal Reforms during the Industrial Revolution in the UK
in the 1800s, and the Progressive Era in the US in the early 20
th
century
 Expansion of franchise to undercut clientelist politics, and strengthen
municipal government incentives to invest in public infrastructure (UK)
 Social movement in the US (known as the Progressive Era) to expose political
corruption (via media) and strengthen professional bureaucracies:
driven by citizens’ (and business groups) demand for local public
infrastructure to support local economic activity
Lessons from many more countries (Bolivia,
Brazil, Mexico, Uganda, Indonesia…)
Stock-taking of evidence 
 Key role of 
political
 engagement by citizens, in
different ways across the spectrum from
competitive democracy to controlled autocracy
Existence of forces of local electoral institutions
within
 countries across the spectrum
Characteristics of local elections matters
profoundly for the economic impact of
decentralization
Lessons from many more countries (Bolivia,
Brazil, Mexico, Uganda, Indonesia…)
Direct Democracy vs. Representative Democracy
 Where are citizens more actively engaged (and thus
revealing what they are willing or able to do):
in local elections to select representative government
leaders who govern on their behalf?
or in participatory committees to directly govern how public
resources get used?
Where do citizens have greater capacity to ensure
local economic development from the use of
devolved resources?
What about local capacity?
Research on how states build capacity to pursue good policies, win compliance
with citizens to generate public revenues to provide public goods needed for
thriving economies
History of how state capacity came about in today’s advanced economies: key role of citizens’
demand for public goods from representative government (
Besley and Persson, 2009
)
Problem of “isomorphic mimicry” in developing countries: 
looking
 like a state but still lacking
real capacity to achieve real outcomes (
Pritchett, Woolcock and Andrews, 2013
)
Many unanswered questions about the role of central governments and
international partners in providing technical assistance to local governments:
Evidence from Tanzania (
Di Maro, Evans, Khemani, Scot, 2022
)
To Summarize:
1.
What do we know from voluminous research on decentralization (and re-
centralization) policies across the world?
1.
Fiscal decentralization is very limited, and fluctuates with re-centralization
2.
Local governments in Africa typically have very few resources, and even what they do
receive is tightly controlled by central government agencies
3.
CDFs are not commonly understood as decentralization to local government:  Zambia’s
initiative can serve a global public good of knowledge on how CDFs can contribute to local
economic development
To Summarize:
2.
Why is the experience of local government in China’s economic transformation
important to learn from…and yet, not directly replicable in different contexts?
1.
Local officials 
can
 
play transformational roles to bring about local economic growth
2.
For local officials to effectively play these roles, they have to have the appropriate
incentives and motivation, aligned with local economic growth
3.
Research suggests that in countries like China, these incentives and motivation arise from
centuries-long institutions of well managed bureaucracies, and social networks among
local officials
4.
The question for countries like Zambia, going forward, is how to leverage their own
institutional context to strengthen incentives and motivation of local officials to use
devolved resources to bring about economic transformation
To Summarize:
3.
What are we learning from current policy advances in Africa, especially
Zambia?
1.
National leaders want to pursue resource devolution to local levels as a core part of their
policy strategies to bring about economic transformation and deliver results to the people
2.
Yet, they remain embroiled in a dilemma: how to ensure that the resources will be
effectively used?
3.
Could the institutional context of active citizen engagement in local elections be used to
make local officials motivated and accountable for delivering economic transformation?
To Summarize:
4.
What are the concrete implications for the design of decentralization policies
going forward? Some initial ideas to offer:
1.
Leverage existing forces of local political contestation, where citizens are actively
participating not just as voters, but perhaps more importantly, as contenders for local
leadership
2.
Experiment with giving greater autonomy to locally elected governments over devolved
funds, with three areas for central intervention to ensure good economic outcomes:
1.
Generate credible data and evidence on the performance of local governments in delivering
infrastructure, services, and economic outcomes, using the resources devolved to them
2.
Facilitate deliberation over local government resources and performance using locally salient
media, such as 
community radio
3.
Provide access to technical training, where needed, for local officials to pursue local economic
growth
Conclusion
Decentralization is not one thing—context specific, history-dependent
Design of decentralization matters for how it works (or not) for achieving
economic transformation
Two broad lessons for Africa, including Zambia:
1.
More
 attention to data-based assessment of
 performance of
 executive local
government 
in local economic development
2.
More leveraging
 of local political contestation—accountability to voters, but
also selection of good leaders, and peer pressure among local leaders
Conclusion
Concrete ideas offered for decentralization policies in Zambia to achieve
economic impact and deliver results to the people:
1.
Generate credible data and evidence on the performance of local governments in
delivering infrastructure, services, and economic outcomes, using the resources
devolved to them
2.
Facilitate deliberation over local government resources and performance using locally
salient media, such as 
community radio
3.
Provide access to technical training, where needed, for local officials to pursue local
economic growth
These ideas can be pursued in a “learning by doing” manner, without 
waiting
 for
research to happen
Experimentally implement as part of current overarching policy framework; monitor and
evaluate; iterate and refine (policy is a continuous process)
Slide Note
Embed
Share

Insights from international experiences on decentralization policies, focusing on fiscal and political decentralization, with examples from Africa, China, and Latin America. Discusses the limitations of fiscal decentralization and the role of Constituency Development Funds in enhancing accountability and incentives for MPs. Emphasizes the importance of learning from diverse contexts to inform future decentralization policies.

  • Decentralization
  • International Experience
  • Fiscal Policy
  • Political Decentralization
  • Accountability

Uploaded on Apr 05, 2024 | 1 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Realizing the Promise of Decentralization Insights from international experience, & the economics of incentives Stuti Khemani Development Research Group & Africa Chief Economist Office, The World Bank Presentation at the Zambia National Decentralization Conference, March 26, 2024

  2. Outline 1. What do we know from voluminous research on decentralization (and re- centralization) policies across the world? 2. Why is the experience of local government in China important to learn from and yet, not directly replicable in different contexts? 3. What are we learning from current policy advances in Africa, especially Zambia? 4. What are the concrete implications for the design of decentralization policies going forward?

  3. What decentralization looks like From voluminous research over decades: Fiscal decentralization is very limited, especially in Africa and South Asia Political decentralization in the form of competitive elections for leadership positions in local government has taken hold

  4. Fiscal decentralization limited General reluctance among national leaders to decentralize actual control over fiscal resources Tightly controlled central grants to hundreds of rural, community-based jurisdictions, with no/little own-revenue bases Fragmentation/multiplication of grants-dependent rural local governments Too little decentralization to urban centers (e.g. in India, vs. China), which would actually have the potential for generating own-revenues from local tax bases (e.g. property) Latin America more advanced: municipal governments financed with own-source revenues, and systematic fiscal transfers with effectively decentralized control

  5. Constituency Development Funds? Not many countries have them Because CDFs are allocated to national member of parliament s (MP s) electoral constituencies, rather than locally elected executive government, not examined in research literature as part of decentralization, per se Research literature focuses on CDFs role in shaping incentives and accountability of MPs Lessons from one of the first CDFs, in India, established in 1993 (Keefer and Khemani, 2010) Another strand is examining Zambia s CDF as a CDD (community-driven- development) program (Casey et al IGC policy paper, 2021)

  6. E.g. Indias MPLADS Each MP, elected from single-member constituencies, allocated >.5million$ per annum, to spend on local public infrastructure (e.g. roads, bridges, school buildings, water bodies, sanitation facilities, etc.) What is not spent can be accumulated into the next year for the constituency, even if the MP changes due to fresh elections Similar institutions (as Zambia s) for community participation in local development plans Implementation via local governments: MPLADS is simply added-on to other work already happening on decentralized service delivery, national policy implementation, and local planning for local economic development

  7. E.g. Indias MPLADS Very low rates of utilization in early years of program shows how difficult it is to either spend/or capture the funds (capture is not easy, even in weak institutional contexts!) Across 543 MP constituencies: Utilization 1993-99 (4 MP cohorts) Utilization 2000-03 (1 MP cohort) Median 36% 85% Increase in utilization over time, and evidence on MPs incentives (Keefer and Khemani, 2009; Blair, 2017), consistent with the program making MPs more accountable for constituency service Average 36% 82% Highest 2 78%, 57% 100% Citizen engagement at local level is happening regardless of the CDF program: citizens were already engaging in local government even in the absence of the CDF Lowest 10% 19%

  8. Political decentralization has taken hold Competitive elections for leadership positions in local governments Very high rates of citizen engagement as voters, but perhaps even more importantly, as contenders for leadership positions

  9. Participation in local elections: as voters voters Local Elections National Elections 100 80 % of respondents 60 40 20 0 Zambia(Afrobarometer 2021/2023): 75% report voting in 2021 national elections (question not asked separately for local elections) Source: World Values Survey: Wave 6, question V226; Wave 7, question Q221

  10. Participation in local elections: as leadership contenders leadership contenders Evidence from micro-empirical research across a diverse range of countries Brazil: Ferraz, Finan and Martinez- Bravo (2020) Pakistan: Gulzar and Khan (2021) Indonesia: case study from Berenschot et al (2021) India (Bihar): Khemani, Chaudhury and Scot (2020) Uganda: Eg. Habyarimana, Khemani and Scot (2018)

  11. Despite widespread malpractices in elections % respondents answering "Very Often" or "Fairly Often" Opposition Candidates Prevented from Running TV News Favors Governing Party Voters are Bribed Rich People Buy Elections 90 Violence at the Polls 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Latin America Sub-Saharan East Asia (w/o China) South Asia OECD MENA Africa Source: World Values Survey wave 7 (2021) MENA module

  12. Belief in importance of honest elections Honest Elections are Very/Rather Important for our lives 100 80 % of Respondents 60 40 20 0 Latin America Sub-Saharan Africa East Asia (w/o China) South Asia OECD MENA Zambia(Afrobarometer 2021/2023): 83% agree with elections as method of choosing leaders, even though there are problems Source: World Values Survey, Wave 7 (2017-2020), Q234 (how important is having honest elections) and Q76 (how much confidence do you have in elections)

  13. Lessons from international experience? Impact of greater devolution of public spending resources on public service delivery, infrastructure, and economic outcomes? Any country that decentralises should expect not one tidy outcome replicated in many localities, but rather a wide variety of outcomes that range from the strongly negative, through the null ( no change ), all the way to highly positive responses. (Faguet, 2024)

  14. Lessons?: China Dramatic economic transformation of China rooted in economic entrepreneurship and infrastructure investments by local government officials Evidence in Ang (2018): How China Escaped the Poverty Trap Comparison of Chinese versus Indian experience by Mookherjee (2021): Tale of Two Asian Tigers fiscal powers of city governments in China (versus lack of such powers in India) is the key difference

  15. Lessons?: history of UK and US Political and Fiscal Reforms during the Industrial Revolution in the UK in the 1800s, and the Progressive Era in the US in the early 20th century Expansion of franchise to undercut clientelist politics, and strengthen municipal government incentives to invest in public infrastructure (UK) Social movement in the US (known as the Progressive Era) to expose political corruption (via media) and strengthen professional bureaucracies: driven by citizens (and business groups) demand for local public infrastructure to support local economic activity

  16. Lessons from many more countries (Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Uganda, Indonesia ) Stock-taking of evidence Key role of political engagement by citizens, in different ways across the spectrum from competitive democracy to controlled autocracy Existence of forces of local electoral institutions within countries across the spectrum Characteristics of local elections matters profoundly for the economic impact of decentralization

  17. Lessons from many more countries (Bolivia, Brazil, Mexico, Uganda, Indonesia ) Direct Democracy vs. Representative Democracy Where are citizens more actively engaged (and thus revealing what they are willing or able to do): in local elections to select representative government leaders who govern on their behalf? or in participatory committees to directly govern how public resources get used? Where do citizens have greater capacity to ensure local economic development from the use of devolved resources?

  18. What about local capacity? Research on how states build capacity to pursue good policies, win compliance with citizens to generate public revenues to provide public goods needed for thriving economies History of how state capacity came about in today s advanced economies: key role of citizens demand for public goods from representative government (Besley and Persson, 2009) Problem of isomorphic mimicry in developing countries: looking like a state but still lacking real capacity to achieve real outcomes (Pritchett, Woolcock and Andrews, 2013) Many unanswered questions about the role of central governments and international partners in providing technical assistance to local governments: Evidence from Tanzania (Di Maro, Evans, Khemani, Scot, 2022)

  19. To Summarize: 1. What do we know from voluminous research on decentralization (and re- centralization) policies across the world? 1. Fiscal decentralization is very limited, and fluctuates with re-centralization 2. Local governments in Africa typically have very few resources, and even what they do receive is tightly controlled by central government agencies 3. CDFs are not commonly understood as decentralization to local government: Zambia s initiative can serve a global public good of knowledge on how CDFs can contribute to local economic development

  20. To Summarize: 2. Why is the experience of local government in China s economic transformation important to learn from and yet, not directly replicable in different contexts? 1. Local officials canplay transformational roles to bring about local economic growth 2. For local officials to effectively play these roles, they have to have the appropriate incentives and motivation, aligned with local economic growth 3. Research suggests that in countries like China, these incentives and motivation arise from centuries-long institutions of well managed bureaucracies, and social networks among local officials 4. The question for countries like Zambia, going forward, is how to leverage their own institutional context to strengthen incentives and motivation of local officials to use devolved resources to bring about economic transformation

  21. To Summarize: 3. What are we learning from current policy advances in Africa, especially Zambia? 1. National leaders want to pursue resource devolution to local levels as a core part of their policy strategies to bring about economic transformation and deliver results to the people 2. Yet, they remain embroiled in a dilemma: how to ensure that the resources will be effectively used? 3. Could the institutional context of active citizen engagement in local elections be used to make local officials motivated and accountable for delivering economic transformation?

  22. To Summarize: 4. What are the concrete implications for the design of decentralization policies going forward? Some initial ideas to offer: 1. Leverage existing forces of local political contestation, where citizens are actively participating not just as voters, but perhaps more importantly, as contenders for local leadership 2. Experiment with giving greater autonomy to locally elected governments over devolved funds, with three areas for central intervention to ensure good economic outcomes: 1. Generate credible data and evidence on the performance of local governments in delivering infrastructure, services, and economic outcomes, using the resources devolved to them 2. Facilitate deliberation over local government resources and performance using locally salient media, such as community radio 3. Provide access to technical training, where needed, for local officials to pursue local economic growth

  23. Conclusion Decentralization is not one thing context specific, history-dependent Design of decentralization matters for how it works (or not) for achieving economic transformation Two broad lessons for Africa, including Zambia: 1. More attention to data-based assessment of performance of executive local government in local economic development 2. More leveraging of local political contestation accountability to voters, but also selection of good leaders, and peer pressure among local leaders

  24. Conclusion Concrete ideas offered for decentralization policies in Zambia to achieve economic impact and deliver results to the people: 1. Generate credible data and evidence on the performance of local governments in delivering infrastructure, services, and economic outcomes, using the resources devolved to them Facilitate deliberation over local government resources and performance using locally salient media, such as community radio Provide access to technical training, where needed, for local officials to pursue local economic growth 2. 3. These ideas can be pursued in a learning by doing manner, without waiting for research to happen Experimentally implement as part of current overarching policy framework; monitor and evaluate; iterate and refine (policy is a continuous process)

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#