Decentralization and public services: the case of immunization

Africa's Unresponsive Democratization: the Relationship between Regime Type and the Quality of Life in Africa

“…When in power, UNIP held a monopoly on all matters of government and was deeply involved in implementing any development policy at the local level (Graham 1994: 151). With it removed from power, Zambia experienced an institutional vacuum and local level government never gained the 60 Indeed decentralization has been associated with higher levels of social service provisions in some studies (Faguet 2004;Khaleghian 2004;Enikolopov and Zhuravskaya 2007), however, others have pointed out that decentralized systems, in certain settings, might be prone to higher levels of corruption than centralized systems (Bardhan and Mookerjee 2000), which would negatively impact accountability in a given political system. capacity needed to fulfill the tasks delegated to them under the new order.…”

The Impact of Decentralization and New Intergovernmental Relations on Public Service Delivery: A Comparative Analysis of Colombia and Paraguay

“…The willingness of people to pay for public services that respond to their priorities, particularly if they were involved in the decision making process, is another potential advantage of decentralization (Litvack & Seddon, 2007). Local governments become in essence more accountable to the local communities (Ahmad et al, 2005;Mehrotra, 2005;Khaleghian, 2003;Azfar et al, 1999).…”

“…As stated by Khaleghian (2003), "Many of the proposed benefits of decentralization are based on the premise that it brings local decision makers closer to the constituencies they serve." With decentralization, social actors will put pressure on local level leadership to respond to local needs and demands, and then two benefits can result: "synergy between interventions across sectors and the effective delivery of individual public services" (Mehrotra, 2005 (Katorobo, p. 26, 2004).…”

“…The research literature also examines problems posed by decentralization-among them the lack of capacity at the local level to implement and deliver new services (Ahmad et al, 2005); the dangers of local elite capture (Bardhan & Mookkherjee, 1998); problems with local corruption and lack of clear legal framework; and excessive borrowing (Ahmad et al, 2005); and, central government resistance (Khaleghian, 2003). In an effort to ensure that services are effectively delivered, issues of relevance and responsiveness must be taken into account, as well as adequacy, costs and benefits, quality and quantity of service, expected outcomes, impact, and timely delivery (Katorobo, 2004).…”

“…What seems to be clear-as Ahmad et al and Azfar et al (2005) notethe importance of accountability and access to information at the local level is vital to the success of services decentralization, along with other key elements such as the existence of a clear legal framework, well defined fiscal and financial arrangements, definition of administrative responsibilities and the infrastructure present locally, the educational level of the communities involved, institutional arrangements, and the levels of poverty present at the time of initializing the decentralization process (Ahmad et al, 2005;Bardhan, 2002;Khaleghian, 2003;Azfar et al, 1999). Health problems in Paraguay are acute and reflect regional and income inequalities.…”