Decentralization Required within Government Institutions to Enhance Democracy in States - Research Paper Example

? Decentralization This paper seeks to the level of decentralization required within government s to enhance democracy instates. Democracy and decentralization is very essential in every state, for numerous reasons. First, the global economy is in an era where there are consistent structural adjustments and persistent economic issues, thus national governments in developing countries tend to reduce some of the services they provide to their citizensi. Private investors and the sector in general may still access some of these services, but non-profit earning and collective goods require funding and delivery by sub-national government units if any of these are to be available. Secondly, research indicates that top down and highly centralized service delivery is cumbersome, expensive, slow, and inflexible to new information, as well as prone to political bias. Third, consistent incapacity and collapse of governments, patterns that are common in education, marketing, and sanitation, highlight the untapped local capacity in taking collective actions and making collective choices. Lastly, past research and studies indicate that for democracy to thrive, it must have foundation in preparatory and local self-governing institutions. Decentralization of power, with emphasis on government institutions, improves the democracy of those institutions. Therefore, the main problem that democracy and decentralization seek address is central state planning and centrally administered bureaucracies. According to critiques of central state planning, administrations that adopt this form of administration suffer from potentially destructive and inefficient methods of allocating resourcesii. There are three assertions used to justify these claims. The first argument is that centrally administered bureaucracies lack place and time knowledge in designing and implementing programs and policies that truly reflect the real preferences and needs of the people. Secondly, based on principles of control and command, states differ qualitatively from markets (based on exchange and competition) and voluntary organizations (based on altruistic motivation measures). From these perspectives, states do not have the reach and flexibility to provide some particular services and goods, especially those that require large information. The last argument suggests that inadequate incentives and unchecked authority (highlighted in promotion rules, salaries, hiring, and so forth may encourage rent-seeking behaviors by officials from the governmentiii. The main case for advocating for democratic decentralization is the assertion that a highly decentralized state apparatus will have more exposure, and thus more responsive and sensitive to local aspirations and needs. Proponents argue that decentralization will create a system of governance that will be more accountable and effective to the local population. Decentralization essentially means more than the downward delegation of authority. Essentially, it implies a system of governance where the local citizens have the right to hold local public officials accountable through collective actions, elections, and other democratic means. Different scholars have researched on the topic of decentralization in the past, including Johnson Craig from the Rural Policy and Environment Group Overseas Development Institute, Sheila Rai, an assistant professor at the at University of Rajasthan in India. Others are Camille Cates Barnett from the Research Triangle Institute, Robert Pringle from The Wilson Quarterly, Jonathan Rodden from Comparative Politics, Maria Escobar-Lemmon from Publius, and R. A. Ayee from African Studies Review, among others. The main area of focus for these scholars has been the positive and negative effects of decentralization, especially democratic decentralizationiv. Jonathan Rodden in “Comparative Federalism and Decentralization: On Meaning and Measurement" and "Fiscal Decentralization and Federalism in Latin America" by Maria Escobar-Lemmon both focus on decentralization and federalism as the dominant contemporary theories that encourage vertical power sharing in multiple government layers, protecting the choice an d interest of the people. Federalism is widely accepted as a form of governance with two or more polity tiers, each having a measure of constitutional autonomy as well as governing and accountability duties to the people. In multicultural, multi-linguistic, and multiethnic states, federalism provides a viable legal and political apparatus that addresses conflict issues and establish peace and order. The federal system prevents the omnipotence of certain portion of powers, enabling numerous power centers to work in coordination in an established constitutional orderv. Additionally, the system also promotes certain democratic processes and procedures in gaining higher degrees of legitimacy from the people living in different regions of the country and possessing different identities. According to the Rodden and Escobar-Lemmon, federalism is the best and most effective way of accommodating diverse interests and managing conflicts, thus enabling establishment of order and peace in a pluralist democracy. Rodden, Escobar-Lemmon, Ayee and Pringle seem to agree on the issue of decentralization. According to the articles FROM the authors, decentralization encourages distribution of power within government organization, availing certain institutional mechanisms that extend democratic powers to the citizens at large. There are distinctions between de-concentration, devolution, and decentralizationvi. De-concentration occurs when local bodies are delegated duties normally done by the central state. Devolution occurs when local bodies receive financial and political authority to undertake such duties. On the other hand, decentralization, with emphasis on democracy, refers to the devolution of meaningful authority to local governance units that are accountable and accessible to local citizens, who enjoy full liberty and political rights. A common defining feature of democratic systems is decision makers are under influence by a popular control of the citizens they are governing. Most researches and studies have not been able to identify how this is accomplished. This particular study is different as it proposes some of the possible factors that enable such occurrences. Among the factors that enable citizens to have a control over the decisions of the leaders include, control of policy makers by pressure form social groups and regular elections, institutionalization of all adult citizens in voting, policy decisions based on majority rule, and political freedom before the statevii. Additionally, these are the defining principles of democracy. The general findings from research on level of decentralization that promotes democracy suggest that decentralization that takes the government to the doorsteps of the local citizens compels public officials to be accountable to the people, promoting democracy. Additionally, responsiveness, accountability, and transparency operate at the level of local governments. This enables creation of balances and checks in the national government. Sources Read More