GOLD Report I - UCLG

AFRICA28 United Cities and Local GovernmentsThe second major tendency is qualitative,an increasing acceptance of the substanceof decentralization as a policy.Although in most African states decentralizationhas long been regarded primarily asan organizational and administrativemanagement technique, it now seems tobe gaining true political substance in manycountries. However slowly and gradually,decentralization is gaining recognition asan effective way to give increasingly robustindependent decision-making powers tolocal governments. This gradual consolidationof local electoral legitimacy alsoenhances the credibility of the decentralizedauthorities. This trend is by no meansdominant; in some areas decentralizingactivities seem to be mixed with traditionalsystems and, as in Algeria, challenged tothe point where it is virtually non-existent.In East and Southern Africa, the history of decentralization isclosely related to the end of social and political crisesMany countries, especially Niger, Senegal,South Africa and Uganda, have alreadyundertaken decentralizing reforms in theorganization of state and public life. Thesecountries have organized local elections, andhave seen local authorities emerging as newpublic authority figures alongside nationalauthorities. Admittedly, in most of thesecountries, the division of public authority hascaused problems. In part, this may simplybe because such a major institutional changecan be absorbed only slowly by manyincumbent national authorities.Implicitly, implementation of the decentralizationprocess has rarely been properlyplanned. While North African countries havea longstanding policy of decentralization,the pace of implementation there is notaltogether uniform. In West and CentralAfrica, apart from Senegal and BurkinaFaso, there is no real plan to implementdecentralization. Rather, moves to decentralizein this region seem to rest on policyannouncements made in the speeches byheads of state. In East and Southern Africa,the history of decentralization is closelyrelated to the end of recent social and politicalcrises. There, implementation of decentralizationhas a high priority ingovernment action plans and seems to besubject to a pre-established, regularlyassessed timetable. The most exemplarycase is South Africa, where the end of theapartheid policy imposed a new approach togovernance that involves the entire populationin public management at all levels. Thispolicy of transformation is enshrined in theReconstruction and Development Program(RDP) whose entire philosophy can be summedup in the slogan "A better life for all."With the Local Government Transition Act(1993), adopted to govern the transitionalperiod, the Municipal System Act (2000)and the Municipal Property Rating Act(2004), the South African government gaveitself 11 years to set up a system of localgovernance that is almost revolutionarycompared with previous practice.Apart from South Africa, African governmentshave not relied on rigorous planningto implement decentralization policies. It isnot surprising, therefore, that most ofthem have no mechanisms to assess theconduct and establishment of such policies.This is why United Cities and LocalGovernment of Africa (UCLGA) is askingthat local governance be included in thegood governance criteria selected by thePeer Review Mechanism of NEPAD.Despite resistance, decentralization ismoving forward in the region. More substantialprogress may be expected as thenumber of local governments increases,and their capacities are enhanced. Understandably,the various decentralizationpolicies have not developed in the samefashion, or in accord with the same timetable.Implementation as well as the contentof policies is strongly influenced by the his-