Effects of Decentralization on Ethnic Conflict Resolution in South Sudan: A Case Study of Juba County

Abstract

Influenced by the neopopulists’ school of thought that decentralization promotes democracy at the local level, which would strengthen national unity in multi-ethnic and multi-religious societies because local autonomies would better accommodate the competing interests of various social groups such as of ethnic and religious minorities, the post-Cold War era has seen localities pressurize central governments to transfer power and authority to them so that they can timely respond to citizens’ needs and contain conflicts. Guided by a conceptual framework which premises that empowered local governments can easily resolve ethnic conflicts through distributive justice, and the reverse is true when they are not adequately empowered, the study shows that: decentralization is yet to address inter-communal conflicts over resources in Juba County because local governments have not been bestowed with adequate powers and autonomy for dealing with impunity, land-grabbing, sabotage of rule of law, corruption, tribalism and nepotism, and unbalanced development.