ABSTRACT
The study investigated decentralization
and local government autonomy and how these factors enhance grassroots
development in Liberia. The onerous centralized system of government practiced
in Liberia is thought to have impeded development and significantly hindered
local participation in decision making. However, it is a litmus test to see if
the Decentralization Policy initiated by the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf administration
will grant local government the requisite autonomy to engage in development at
the local level.
The study adopted a survey research
design .The population of the study was the entire population of Liberia with a
population of 4.5 million people
according to the Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information 2008
National Census. The largeness of the population compelled the researcher to
draw the sample from three counties that were purposively selected and a total
of 395 respondents as sample size. The main instrument of the study was
questionnaire which was tested with a reliability of 0.88 Cronbach Alpha. A
total of 395 questionnaire were administered and 386 of those were retrieved
for analysis. Data collected was analyzed with SPSS version 21 through
descriptive and inferential statistics.
The findings gathered from the study revealed
that the three counties selected, Bong had the highest (56%) respondents,
followed by Nimba (35%) and Gbarpolu (9%) respectively and that most
respondents had acquired secondary education (51%), followed by Bachelor
Degrees (34%) and a few Masters. Also, the findings of the study revealed that
Liberia has a centralized system of governance which has impeded development
and punctured political participation in decision making. It was disclosed by
the findings that decentralization is not an entirely new phenomenon; but its
realization has been hampered by lack of defined policy and legislation. Lack
of professionals, government’s commitment and political will were identified as
some factors that militate against decentralization. Additionally, it was unearthed
that the applicability of decentralization is assured as it builds the fiscal,
political, economic and decision-making capacities of local sub government.
Finally and by no means the least, local government was identified as engines
of development because of it nature and proximity to those they represent.
The study concluded that
decentralization and local government autonomy are two distinct, but
inseparable precursors of grassroots development. The following recommendation
were proffered based on the findings: there should be concerted effort for the
three branches of the Liberian government should coordinate by increasing
budgetary allotment to support the decentralization process and enact or repeal
laws that promoted centralization; there should be attractive salaries to lure
professionals to the counties and each county should have a university to groom
would-be leaders of the county; information regarding implementation of the
policy be properly disseminated to suit local consumption and there should be
continuity of the policy because most policies died with successive government.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
to the Study
Decentralization
as a concept is not completely new to Africa; but rather, it has adopted
diverse strategies. English speaking and French Speaking African nations have
seen various pre-and post-war decentralizations. After independence,
governments across Africa kept on utilizing governments at the local levels as
administrative units, and significant elements of local governments, for
example, basic healthcare, construction of roads, education and local revenue
collection were shifted toward central government control (Gbartea, 2011).
Kiwanuka
(2012) believes that African nations have additionally capitulated to the
expanding wave of cities and metropolitans. Some dominant elites groups in
Africa, for example, the Americo-Liberian in Liberia embraced decentralization
as a means to bargain with local elites with secessionist tendencies, and as a
remedy for political instability. Nations began truly considering
decentralization as an option after the manifest disappointments resulting from
centralized economic planning in the 1970’s. Although there was no confirmation
that decentralization would succeed, there were adequate information
demonstrating that the centralized system of governance had failed (Awortwi,
2010). As Mookherjee (2006) observes, the primary reason for embarking upon
decentralization is that transfer of some central government powers, assets,
duties, and responsibility to lower tiers empowers local institutions and
associations to engage in more successful self-administration and improvement suitable
to local conditions.
The
historical backdrop of modern local government systems in developing nations,
including Liberia, is stacked with experimentation. There have been purposeful
endeavors to modernize; however, tradition is still profoundly established
(Ekpe, 2007). Some eminent issues confronting local government systems in
developing nations with Liberia not an exemption include, but rather are not
restricted to, basic dysfunctionality, absence of acceptable and ideal
structure, capacities and duties. At the point when these are tended to, local
government could be receptive to the necessities of the rural citizens who make
up a large number of the populace in the developing countries (Ekpe, Ekpe, and
Daniels, 2013).
The
Liberian Local Government system is exceptional when contrasted with different
countries in West Africa. Local Government authorities, generally, are
designated by the central government, and have no characterized powers and
capacities. All choices with respect to development projects and use of money
are made at the central, and the local governments are compelled to do the
bidding of the central government (Gbartea, 2011). The 1986 Constitution of the
Republic of Liberia gives the President the exclusive authority to appoint
county administrators and other local authorities (Article 54 Sec D). The
Constitution additionally states in Article 56 (A) that every single such
authority appointed by the President holds office at the pleasure and will of
that President. This obviously has been the pattern of administration in
Liberia since the 1986 Constitution came into existence. Authorities of
government work at the will of the President and are not responsible to the
general population even at the local sub-units (Gbala, 2004).
The
process of decentralization in Liberia began as far back as the later phase of
the nineteenth century. In 1880, G.W. Gibson outlined a plan by which full
citizenship would extend to aboriginal groups in return for an increased
production of agricultural commodities. However, the coming of Arthur Barclay
to the presidency of Liberia in 1904 is by and large considered a defining
moment in Liberian politics; since it denoted the start of a deliberate,
official strategy to build up a hinterland administration grounded on the
British principle of indirect rule. Barclay formally established the principle
of recognizing the pre-existing indigenous power structures (or rather, what
"Americo-Liberians" took for indigenous power structures) and
controlling through powerful families of local political groups. He imposed a
uniform system of administration through a two-layered system of
"Paramount Chiefs" and "Town Chiefs" on the hinterland
(Gerdes, 2013).
Afterward,
President William V.S. Tubman in 1948 promulgated the Unification Policy which
was adapted towards integrating the hinterland. His endeavors can, to a
significant degree, be traced to the way that Tubman, brought up in Maryland
County, was relatively untouched by the Monrovia establishment and in part turned
to less powerful groups with a specific end goal to build a voting public
(Pham, 2004).
Immediately
following President Johnson- Sirleaf ascendency in 2006, the President's
administration started sweeping changes geared toward the consolidation of peace
and the establishment of a legal framework simultaneously that would set the
basis for a decentralized system of government. Amongst her first acts as
President, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf repositioned the Governance Reform Commission
(GRC) which was a brainchild of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in
Accra, Ghana, which was geared toward promoting good governance and instituting
public sector management reforms. Executive Order Number 2, issued March 6,
2006 changed the GRC into the Governance Commission (GC) authorized to finalize
and actualize blue print giving alternatives to political, social and economic
decentralization (USAID, 2012).
In any
case, the return to civilian democratic leadership in Liberia was an initial
step to bringing sustainable change. The first post- war government
through an initiative of the President introduced programs and
decision-making processes geared toward empowering local citizens to take
interest in electing county officials, and managing local development. This process
could be enhanced, and will engender adequate local participation in making
decision at the local level (Nyei, 2011).
Alongside
the draft Local Government Act of 2013, the decentralization process will
concede political, fiscal, administrative and economic autonomy to the
counties; this will induce sufficient participation in basic leadership at the
local level, allowing local ownership of development activities.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
In line with the current global trend of
streamlining the role of the state, the governments of most developing
countries including Liberia have
devolved power to grassroots institutions with a view to enhance development. Grassroots
development is very essential to the overall development of any country. It is
intended to bring development closer to the people and enhance local
participation in the governance process of any country.
However,
this seems to be absent in Liberia. Liberia has been branded as under-developed
after several decades of existence. The country remains inaccessible and
impassable after more than a century and a half of existence. The administrative system of governance and
development initiatives have been firmly situated in the capital and in the
hands of a very few people with the president at the center of this hegemonic
authority. There seems to be lack of basic structures at the local
level which leads to government employees at all levels to abandon their duties
to travel to the capital to receive their pay check not without difficulty.
Local government employees are seen as an extension of the government in the
capital; at such, they are reportable to their bosses in the capital in every
respect.
Additionally, rural citizens lack control
over resources and the opportunity to participate in decision making. They are
not empowered to participate or engage their leaders in the development
process. Development programs are planned by stakeholders at the central level;
some of whom have not seen what is obtainable at the local level. Consequently, this has led the researcher to
investigate the centralized problem and how decentralization and local
government autonomy could enhance grassroots development in Liberia
1.3 Objective of the Study
The
main objective of the study is to examine the roles of decentralization and
local government autonomy in the assessment of grassroots development in
Liberia. The specific objectives are to:
1.
examine
the implication of centralized system of administration to grassroots
development in Liberia;
2.
investigate
the type of decentralization adopted and factors impeding its realization in
Liberia;
3.
probe
the applicability of decentralization to grassroots development in post- war
Liberia and
4.
interrogate
the usefulness of local government to grassroots development in Liberia.
1.4 Research Questions
1.
How has
the centralized system of administration affected grassroots development in Liberia?
2.
What
are the forms of decentralization practiced in Liberia and factors militating
against its realization?
3.
How is decentralization
applicable to grassroots development in post-war Liberia?
4.
To what
extent is local government useful to grassroots development in Liberia?
1.5 Justification for the Study
In
2010, the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf administration initiated a policy to
decentralize development especially to the grassroots level. Consequently,
research needs to be done to ascertain the applicability of decentralization in
Liberia. Unlike other studies that consider decentralization as a process in
itself, the research will be unique because it seeks to assess the relationship
between local government autonomy and the way(s) in which local government
autonomy can serve as a vehicle that drives decentralization which will lead to
grassroots development in Liberia.
As observed
by the researcher, there is gamut of extant literature on decentralization.
However, it seems that very few publications are available to validate the
Liberian case. The research benefitted scholars who intend to embark on similar
project and add to the few literatures on Liberia decentralization process.
This research has provided the major stakeholders including but not limited to
government actors and Civil Society the requisite knowledge on the process of
decentralization.
The
decentralization process is ongoing in Liberia. As such, policy makers need to
be guided to make decision from an informed position. Along with other studies
in this area, the study served as a guide to policy makers on priority areas
that need to be addressed. This work added to the existing, though few
literatures on Liberia decentralization. The findings provided stakeholders
firsthand information on what is obtainable at the local level and unearth
those challenges that exist which could also prompt further research as Liberia
earnestly strives to take grassroots development to the local level.
1.6 Scope of the Study
The
study focused on the period from 2010 to 2015. The time frame was considered
because of the decentralization policy initiated by the Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
led government in 2010 which is set to pave the way for local government
autonomy through deconcentration and devolution.
The
study covered three of the four major regions of the country. One county from each region was selected. The
counties that were selected are seen as the hub of each region. The counties to
be selected are also the “regional headquarters” of each of the three major
zones. The three regions are the Southwest, the North and the Central. The
counties that the study took into account are Gbarpolu County in the Southwest,
Nimba County in the North, and Bong County in the Central region.
The
study investigated the problems caused by centralization and how those problems
have hindered development at the grassroots level. Explanations were sought
from extant literature on the process of decentralization and its relevance to
grassroots development in Liberia. Local government autonomy was also examined
as a vehicle through which the process of decentralization can be achieved.
The
National Decentralization and Local Governance Policy was initiated in 2010
after the President and relevant ministries and agencies embarked on a
nationwide consultative process to harness the views of locals. The hitherto
policy is expected to pave the way for increased local self-governance aimed at
enhancing development. The policy has five distinct parts. The researcher
considered key components of the Policy including Part one of the Policy
entitled Policy Framework; the Structure of County Government (Part two); and
some major section under part three entitled Powers of the County Government.
Additionally, the researcher considered the Fiscal Powers of Local Government
under part four. The Preamble of the Policy was considered as it specifically
outlined the nature of the Policy (see appendix four).
1.7 Operational Definition of Terms
Decentralization: basically, the concept implies that there
is a horizontal transfer of authority and decision-making from a higher sphere
to lower tiers.
Devolution:this involves a significant transfer of some
political, administrative and fiscal authority to governments usually at the
local level.
Deconcentration: this primarily involves decongesting
central government of its many functions by assigning duties and responsibilities
to field units detached from the capital.
Local Government:government closest to a locale which carries
out administrative and executive functions assigned to it by statute or law.
Delegation: a
form of decentralization wherein central government designates duties and
responsibilities to agencies that are not necessarily under the jurisdiction of
the central authority; however, reportability remains to the central
government.
Grassroots
Development: For this study grassroots developments refer to initiatives aim at
spreading development evenly across the local level of government. For the
purpose of this study grassroots development is used interchangeably with rural
development.
Autonomy: autonomy can be understood from the perspective of this
study as the right to self-administration.
Local
Government Autonomy: in
this study local government autonomy is giving local communities the right to
governed themselves by initiating development activities and engaging in
decision making. It is used synonymously with Local Governance in this study.
1.8
Plan of Work
The researcher organized the study into five
chapters. The first chapter is captioned introduction. Here the researcher
discussed the background of the study, the statement of the research problem
and the objectives of the study. These objectives are transformed into research
questions. The significance of the study is explained followed by the scope of
the study. Key terms and concepts are defined to suit the purpose of the study.
The second chapter is the review of extant and related literature on the area
of study. The theoretical framework of the study was also discussed in chapter
two and gaps in literature are proffered by the researcher. Chapter three
discusses the methodology the study incorporated. Chapter four is where the
researcher did data analysis and discussion of findings of the study. Chapter
five concludes the study and provides recommendations from the researcher.
================================================================
Item Type: Postgraduate Material | Attribute: 82 pages | Chapters: 1-5
Format: MS Word | Price: N3,000 | Delivery: Within 30Mins.
================================================================
No comments:
Post a Comment