Local Government Decentralization Research Articles

財政赤字と上からの地方分権

財政赤字と上からの地方分権

The Impact of Local Decentralization on Economic Growth: Evidence from U.S. Counties

We analyze the impact of fiscal decentralization on U.S. county population, employment, and real income growth. Our findings suggest that government organization matters for local economic growth, but that the impacts vary by government unit and by economic indicator. We find that single-purpose governments per square mile have a positive impact on metropolitan population and employment growth, but no significant impact on nonmetropolitan counties. In contrast, the fragmentation of general-purpose governments per capita has a negative impact on employment and population growth in nonmetropolitan counties. Our results suggest that local government decentralization matters differently for metropolitan and nonmetropolitan counties.

Decentralization and Democracy in Eastern Europe: A Sceptical Approach

The author focuses on the link between local government decentralization and democracy in Eastern Europe. It is shown that decentralization is a multidimensional concept and that actual local government systems can be positioned differently on each dimension (functions, control, and finance) depending on the implicit model of local government. Formal and substantive definitions of democracy are distinguished and some conventional measures examined; it is concluded that decentralization and democracy do not necessarily go together. The degree of decentralization and implicit models of postsocialist local government in Eastern Europe are then outlined, with a focus on the contrast between Budapest and Moscow. The development of social movements in the two capitals is taken as an index of substantive democracy and is shown to be influenced not only by the extent of decentralization but also by other features of the local political context. This illustrates the earlier argument that the relation between decentralization and democracy is an empirically variable one rather than a necessary one.

Local government decentralization and the health sector in Tanzania

AbstractAn evaluation of primary‐level healthcare undertaken in Tanzania 1989‐91 found that district health managers felt powerless to address health care performance weaknesses, although the district is the unit to which government management functions have been decentralized. In order to understand the managers views, this article analyses the pattern of decentralization within the health system from their perspective. It reviews the hislorical development of government structures and the theory and practice of decentralization within Tanzania. The matrix of accountability for health care has become very confusing, with multiple and cross‐cutting flows of authority within and between levels of the system. District health managers have limited authority to take management action, such as managing resources, in ways that would begin to address problems of inefficiency and poor quality of care within primary care. District health management also suffers from weak resource allocation and financial management piocedures. The main obstacles preventing more effective management are: resource constraints; conflicts between the demands for central control and local discretion; limited institutional capacity; and political and cultural influences over the implementation of decentralization. Evaluation of past experience suggests that future policy influencing the organizational structure of government health services must be developed cautiously, recognizing the critical importance of complementary action to develop both institutional capacity and political and economic support for the health system.

Decentralization and district development planning in Zimbabwe

AbstractOne of the most important dimensions of rural development policy in Zimbabwe since independence has been rural local government reform, in particular decentralization policy. Evidence from a number of recent studies is used to present a comprehensive review of Zimbabwe's experience of local government decentralization during the first eight years of independence, 1980 to 1988. Section 2 presents a brief outline of some basic concepts on decentralization which have guided the discussion. Section 3 contains a short account of the local government system inherited from the colonial era. Section 4 outlines the major post‐independence reforms, that is: the 1980 District Councils Act; the 1984‐85 Prime Minister's Directive on Decentralization; the 1985 Provincial Councils and Administration Act; and the 1988 Rural District Councils Act. Section 5 presents an assessment of these reforms, paying particular attention to organizational, financial and planning issues. While some important improvements have been achieved in rural Communal Areas‐in particular the extension of services and increases in local revenues and popular participation‐the system of local government and administration remains a dual one. Other problems include the gap between the planning and budgeting processes, continued financial dependence of district councils on central government, and a lack of serious effort by central government to make use of provincial and district development plans.