2. DECENTRALIZATION:AN OVERVIEW DENNIS A. RONDINELLI Kenan Institute of Private Enterprise Kenan-Flagler Business School UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, CHAPEL HILL, N.C. 27599-3440 dennis_rondinelli@unc.edu

3. DECENTRALIZATION TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY FOR PUBLIC FUNCTIONS >FROM A HIGHER LEVEL OF (CENTRAL) GOVERNMENT TO SUBORDINATE OR QUASI- INDEPENDENT GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS, OR >FROM GOVERNMENT TO NONGOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS OR THE PRIVATE SECTOR DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

4. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

5. REASONS FOR DECENTRALIZING > IDEOLOGICAL --DISTRUST OR LACK OF CONFIDENCE IN CENTRAL GOVERNMENT --BELIEF IN VALUE OF INDIVIDUAL AND LOCAL RESPONSIBILITY AND AUTONOMY --REACTION AGAINST CENTRALIST OR AUTHORITARIAN FORMS OF GOVERNMENT > POLITICAL --AUTONOMY OR REPRESENTATION --DEMOCRATIZATION (POLITICAL PARTICIPATION) --CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFF-LOADING OF EXPENSIVE OR POLITICALLY TROUBLESOME FUNCTIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

6. REASONS FOR DECENTRALIZING > MORE EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE PROVISION OF PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE --OPTIMIZING HIERARCHY OF SERVICE DELIVERY --TAILORING SERVICES TO LOCAL NEEDS AND CONDITIONS --IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE MAINTENANCE --RELIEVING CENTRAL GOVT. OF ROUTINE FUNCTIONS TO CONCENTRATE ON POLICY --INCREASING “COMPETITIVENESS” IN SERVICE PROVISION (AMONG GOVERNMENT UNITS & BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS) --MAKE BUREAUCRACIES MORE CUSTOMER ORIENTED DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

7. REASONS FOR DECENTRALIZING > CHANGING GLOBAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LOCAL AND REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT --GROWING IMPORTANCE OF GLOBAL TRENDS IN SHAPING NATIONAL AND SUB-NATIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -- IMPORTANCE OF “LOCATION-SPECIFIC ASSETS” IN ATTRACTING AND NURTURING ENTERPRISES > EQUITY --PROVIDE RESOURCES AND AUTHORITY FOR PURSUING LOCAL PRIORITIES AND NEEDS --PROVIDE OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL JURISDICTIONS TO MAKE OWN DECISIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

9. POTENTIAL DISADVANTAGES OF DECENTRALIZATION > POSSIBLE MACROECONOMIC INSTABILITY > INEFFICIENCIES IN HIGHLY STANDARDIZED FUNCTIONS > LOSS OF ECONOMIES OF SCALE > DETERIORATION IN SERVICE QUALITY AND DELIVERY IF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION WEAK >LOCAL ELITES OR INTEREST GROUPS MAY CAPTURE CONTROL >REDUCES ABILITY OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO CONTROL OR COORDINATE >NEW TYPES OF INEQUITIES DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

10. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

12. FORMS OF POLITICAL DECENTRALIZATION > FEDERALISM > REGIONAL AUTONOMY (CONFEDERATION) > MORE REPRESENTATIVE DECISIONMAKING > PARTICIPATORY DEMOCRACY(EXPANSION OF ELECTORAL PARTICIPATION) > DELEGATION OF POLITICAL DECISION-MAKING AUTHORITY > POLITICAL PARTY PLURALISM > DIVISION OF POWERS AMONG GOVERNANCE INSTITUTIONS (LEGISLATURE, JUDICIARY, EXECUTIVE) DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

13. ADMINISTRATIVE DECENTRALIZATION DECONCENTRATIONDELEGATIONDEVOLUTION SHIFT OF WORKLOAD FIELD ADMINISTRATION LOCAL ADMINISTRATION SPECIAL AUTHORITIES REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS FUNCTIONAL AUTHORITIES PUBLIC CORPORATIONS STATES REGIONAL JURISDICTIONS PROVINCES DISTRICTS MUNICIPALITIES CITIES DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

16. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

18. POTENTIAL STAKEHOLDERS IN DECENTRALIZATION DECENTRALIZATION PROPOSALS NATIONAL POLITICAL LEADERS NATIONAL CIVIL SERVANTS LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS LABOR UNIONS NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS COMMUNITY LEADERS BUSINESS LEADERS INTERNATIONAL ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

21. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

22. NATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT > FUNCTIONS OR RESPONSIBILITIES OF NATIONAL MINISTRIES >LEGISLATIVE OR CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AFFECTING DISTRIBUTION OF GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBILITIES >SPAN AND SCOPE OF AUTHORITY OF NATIONAL AGENCIES OVER SUBORDINATE UNITS OF ADMINISTRATION >CAPACITY OF NATIONAL AGENCIES TO PERFORM FUNCTIONS EFFECTIVELY, EFFICIENTLY, EQUITABLY AND ACCOUNTABLY >SPECIFIC CONSTRAINTS OR LIMITATIONS ON NATIONAL MINISTRIES IN CARRYING OUT THEIR FUNCTIONS >REASONS FOR PERFORMANCE GAPS IN NATIONAL MINISTRIES’ ABILITY TO CARRY OUT RESPONSIBILITIES (INTERNAL/EXTERNAL) >CONSEQUENCES OF CONTINUED CENTRALIZATION OF RESPONSIBILITY AT NATIONAL LEVEL >OPTIONS FOR IMPROVING CENTRAL MINISTRY PERFORMANCE DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

23. LOCAL LEVEL INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT > STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION OF LOCAL INSTITUTIONS > RESPONSIBILITIES AND FUNCTIONS OF LOCAL INSTITUTIONS > ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN LOCAL AND NATIONAL INSTITUTIONS > FISCAL CAPACITY OF LOCAL INSTITUTIONS (REVENUE RAISING AND EXPENDITURE) > ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY OF LOCAL INSTITUTIONS (PLANNING, BUDGETING, MANAGEMENT, SERVICE DELIVERY, MAINTENANCE, ETC.) > ACCOUNTABILITY, ACCESSIBILITY AND “CUSTOMER ORIENTATION” OF LOCAL INSTITUTIONS > REASONS FOR PERFORMANCE GAPS IN LOCAL INSTITUTIONS > OPTIONS FOR IMPROVING LOCAL INSTITUTIONAL PERFORMANCE > CAPACITY TO TAKE ON ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES/FUNCTIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

24. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

26. ORGANIZATIONAL OPTIONS PUBLIC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------PRIVATE CENTRAL MINISTRIES FIELD AGENCIES OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT REGIONAL OR PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PUBLIC CORPORATIONS SPECIAL AUTHORITIES PUBLIC- PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS PUBLIC CONTRACTING NONGOVT. ORGANIZATIONS COOPERATIVES NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS “REGULATED INDUSTRIES” PRIVATE FIRMS INDIVIDUALS “QUASI-MARKET” PROGRAMS (VOUCHERS) DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

27. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

28. ASSESSING FINANCIAL OPTIONS DECENTRALIZED RESPONSIBILITIES ABCDEFABCDEF INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSFERS CO-FINANCING USER CHARGES LOCAL REVENUES BORROWING CONTRIBUTIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

29. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

30. FACTORS SUPPORTING IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALIZATION POLITICAL FACTORS > STRONG POLITICAL COMMITMENT AND SUPPORT FROM NATIONAL POLITICAL LEADERS > SUPPORT (OR LACK OF OPPOSITION) TO DECENTRALIZATION BY NATIONAL AGENCIES > ACCEPTANCE BY POLITICAL LEADERS OF LOCAL OR NONGOVERNMENTAL PARTICIPATION > EFFECTIVE CHANNELS OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND REPRESENTATION DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

31. ORGANIZATIONAL AND ADMINSTRATIVE FACTORS > CENTRAL GOVT. CAPACITY TO SUPPORT LOCAL UNITS > APPROPRIATE ALLOCATION OF FUNCTIONS BETWEEN CENTRAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS > TRANSPARENT AND DEFINITIVE DECENTRALIZATION LAWS, REGULATIONS, DIRECTIVES > ARRANGEMENTS FOR RE-ALLOCATING RESPONSIBILITIES BASED ON PERFORMANCE > CLEARLY DEFINED ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR LOCAL OFFICIALS > CHANNELS FOR CITIZEN PARTICIPATION OR REPRESENTATION AT LOCAL LEVELS FACTORS SUPPORTING IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALIZATION DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

32. FACTORS SUPPORTING IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALIZATION BEHAVIORAL FACTORS > FAVORABLE ATTITUDES OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TOWARD LOCAL PARTICIPATION > SUFFICIENT LEVEL OF TRUST BETWEEN CENTRAL AND LOCAL OFFICIALS > EFFECTIVE MEANS OF OVERCOMING RESISTANCE OR ELICITING SUPPORT OF LOCAL LEADERS > STRONG LEADERSHIP IN LOCAL ADMINISTRATIVE UNITS AND NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

33. FACTORS SUPPORTING IMPLEMENTATION OF DECENTRALIZATION RESOURCE FACTORS > TRANSFER OF SUFFICIENT LEGAL AUTHORITY TO CARRY OUT DECENTRALIZED RESPONSIBILITIES > ADEQUATE TRANSFER OF FINANCIAL RESOURCES OR REVENUE RAISING AUTHORITY > ADEQUATE TRAINING AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS TO BUILD INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AT LOCAL LEVELS > SUFFICIENT ORGANIZATIONAL AND PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AT LOCAL LEVELS TO CARRY OUT FUNCTIONS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

34. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

35. “GUIDELINES” FOR IMPLEMENTATION > BEGIN WITH PILOT OR DEMONSTRATION PROGRAMS > EXPAND GRADUALLY (OVER TIME AND UNITS OF ORGANIZATION BASED ON PERFORMANCE CRITERIA) > KEEP PROCEDURES, PROCESSES, REQUIREMENTS, AND RULES SIMPLE AND FLEXIBLE > PLAN FOR THE LONG-TERM --ORGANIZATIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE IS SLOW DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

37. “GUIDELINES” FOR IMPLEMENTATION DECENTRALIZATION DEPENDS ON BUILDING TRUST BETWEEN CENTRAL AND LOCAL LEVELS BETWEEN GOVERNMENT AND CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS AND BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

39. “GUIDELINES” FOR IMPLEMENTATION ULTIMATELY, DECENTRALIZATION IS AN EXERCISE IN INSTITUTIONAL AND HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SUCCESS OF DECENTRALIZATION DEPENDS ON EXPANDING AND IMPROVING MANAGEMENT CAPACITY MANAGEMENT IS A “PERFORMING ART” - capacity building depends on doing it. DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

42. “GUIDELINES” FOR IMPLEMENTATION MECHANISMS MUST BE DEVELOPED TO ASSURE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY, AND PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION NEED FOR SYSTEMS OF “CHECKS & BALANCES” DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL

43. 1. ASSESSMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 2. ASSESSMENT OF CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES TO DECENTRALIZATION 3. PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POLITICAL SUPPORT-- STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 5. ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL ALTERNATIVES 4. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE 6. ASSESSMENT OF FINANCIAL OPTIONS 7. SELECTION OF FEASIBLE DECENTRALIZATION OPTIONS 8. DEVELOPMENT OF DECENTRALIZATION IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY DECENTRALIZATION ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK DENNIS A. RONDINELLI, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL DECENTRALIZATION IS AN INSTRUMENT NOT A PANACEA OR AN END IN ITSELF