Kenya - Challenges of Devolution

Table of Contents

Introduction        3

Devolution: A Brief Literature Review        3

Kenya’s unique cooperative devolution        4

Challenges of Devolution        5

Kenya’s unique form of devolution is proving hard to implement        5

The Absence of Strong and Committed Champions of Implementation        6

A Weakened National Government and Reduced Ability        7

Turf wars among and institutional incoherence        7

Over-politicization of the process        8

Conflict between oversight and the spirit of cooperation        8

Slowness in establishing a strong civil society at the counties        8

Failure to prioritize key projects        9

Capacity problems        9

Ethnicity entrenching non-performance        9

Conclusion        10

Introduction

Kenyans, have for long, demanded for a devolved system of government, a preference confirmed in the overwhelming affirmative vote cast to approve the Constitution of Kenya (CoK) in August 2010. To the majority of Kenyans devolution was a solution to the many problems facing the country since independence, namely:poor governance, corruption, unfair distribution of, and conflict over resources wastefulness, the alienation of large portions of society from mainstream economy and government, massive poverty and historical injustices. This explains why, of the many changes made to the governance of the country by the CoK (2010), devolution is the most significant.The impact and ramifications of devolution in altering how people relate with their government and how resources are utilized and distributed promised to have far-reaching implications for Kenyans. Indeed, the success or failure of devolution will be a major determining factor on how people rate the success or failure of the CoK (2010).

The CoK together with the Devolved Government Act (2012) not only provide the principles and values of devolution but set quite high standards upon those who administer the devolved governments to ensure better, more and cheaperservices for the people. As a result, people’s expectations from the devolved governments are very high. This paper discusses Kenya’s experiences with devolution. It is four years since the promulgation of the CoK (2010) and over a year since the devolved structures came into existence. While the expectations of Kenyans on devolution have remained high, the process seems to be losing steam. The political elite and institutions responsible for its implementation are engaged in endless political wrangles, which have threatened the entire process. This paper explores the challenges the process is facing.

Devolution: A Brief Literature Review

Devolution is the transfer of political, administrative and legal authority, power and responsibility from a central government to sub-national level units of government, at the local or regional levels of government, created by the Constitution. The purpose is to enable the devolved units to perform specific functions and responsibilities”(Carino, 2007). Devolution seeks to strengthen local governments by granting them the authority, responsibility, and resources to provide services and to formulate and implement local policies. The devolved units are autonomous from each other, though functionally interdependent and must recognize that they are part of a larger system, whose survival and functionality depends on their interdependence.

Devolution is universally accepted as desirable (Carino, 2007) and provides a number of benefits. First, devolution allows for greater representation of minorities and the marginalized (Otieno, 2013)and equity in resources allocation (Hope, 2012)while increasing political stability and unity(Hope, 2012). The marginalized, poor and neglected communities, as a result, tend to improve with devolution. This, it does, by giving more groups a greater stake in maintaining the political system while overcoming the control of local elites who are insensitive to the needs of the poor. Second, by bringing government closer to the people, devolution institutionalizes and increases people’s participation as well as holding the government more accountable (Putnam, 1993). Local governments, serving local communities will be more responsive to their needs than a central government(Brancati, 2006).This happens when people with better knowledge of local conditions and local preferences are put in charge. Increased participation and control by locals enhances democratic political culture, creating new and more autonomous political spaces for popular participation. Third, local communities are empowered to demand for accountability and better services, which lead to improvements in service provision (Morgan, 2002 ). Fourth, devolution increases competition within the various units, promoting efficiency in both service provision and resource allocation. This reduces opportunities for corruption and other rent seeking behavior(Keating, 1998;Thissen, 2001). Eventually, the problems associated with centralization, such as corruption, inefficient service provision and bureaucratic excesses reduce, if not altogether eliminated (Donahue, 1997).

The above notwithstanding, transitioning to a devolved system has been challenging. Since the powers and functions to be devolved belonged to the centralized unit in existence before the effective day of devolution, the entire process and the complete transfer of powers, authority, responsibility and resources takes time, even years. There are important administrative changes that need to take place and institutions created to facilitate the transfer, both time consuming. The process of transferring functions and resources is a political one, wrought with challenges and resistance from quarters that had benefitted from the centralized system, slowing down the process. Further, although the devolved units enjoy autonomy from the centre, the centre still plays an important role in its implementation, often raising questions of the national government’s willingness to devolve. Thus, to succeed devolution has to be conceived as the transfer of power and authority to the people and not to local governments (Kauzya, 2007).

Other factors challenge the initial stages of transition to devolution. First, is the fear of the devolved units demanding for more resources and functions, beyond their capacity(Cheema & Rondinelli, 2007). Second, is a fear of the new leadership in the devolved units becoming local dictators (Kauzya, 2007) where power becomes more concentrated, more elitist and applied more ruthlessly, jeopardizing citizen participation or reducing it to a token level (Carino, 2007). Third, is a fear of elements of the former centralized government resisting devolution of certain functions andfinancial resources. The initial phases of devolution are therefore, contested(Cheema & Rondinelli, 2007), as devolved units demand for more functions while the national government delays it until there is more capacity.