Dissatisfied with centralized approaches to delivering local public services, a large number of countries are decentralizing responsibility for these services to lower-level, locally elected governments. The results have been mixed. The paper provides a framework for evaluating the benefits and costs, in terms of service delivery, of different approaches to decentralization, based on relationships of accountability between different actors in the delivery chain. Moving from a model of central provision to that of decentralization to local governments introduces a new relationship of accountability-between national and local policymakers-while altering existing relationships, such as that between citizens and elected politicians. Only by examining how these relationships change can we understand why decentralization can, and sometimes cannot, lead to better service delivery. In particular, the various instruments of decentralization-fiscal, administrative, regulatory, market, and financial-can affect the incentives facing service providers, even though they relate only to local policymakers. Likewise, and perhaps more significantly, the incentives facing local and national politicians can have a profound effect on the provision of local services. Finally, the process of implementing decentralization can be as important as the design of the system in influencing service delivery outcomes.

This paper explores the impact of fiscal decentralization on the efficiency of public service delivery. It uses a stochastic frontier method to estimate time-varying efficiency coefficients and analyzes the impact of fiscal decentralization on those efficiency coefficients. The findings indicate that fiscal decentralization can improve the efficiency of public service delivery but only under specific conditions. First, the decentralization process requires adequate political and institutional environments. Second, a sufficient degree of expenditure decentralization seems necessary to obtain favorable outcomes. Third, decentralization of expenditure needs to be accompanied by sufficient decentralization of revenue. Absent those conditions, fiscal decentralization can worsen the efficiency of public service delivery.

Is decentralisation good for development? This book explains when the answer is 'Yes' and when it is 'No'. It shows how decentralisation can be designed to drive development forward, and focuses on the institutional incentives that can strengthen democracy, boost economies, and improve public sector performance.

Abstract: This paper discusses decentralization (administrative, fiscal and political) of government in public service provision. It aims to facilitate understanding among practitioners, policy makers, and scholars about what decentralization entails in practice compared to theory. A review of the empirical literature and experience of decentralization is presented. The paper highlights issues that policy makers in developing and transitional countries should be aware of when reforming government, considering their unique political and economic environment. The author argues that decentralization produces efficiency gains stemming from inter-jurisdictional competition, enhanced checks and balances over the government through voting at the subnational level, and informational advantages due to proximity to citizens. By contrast, arguments against decentralization include the risk of an increased level of corruption, coordination problems stemming from multiple layers of government, low capacity of subnational government, and unproductive inter-jurisdictional competition. Decentralization itself does not render increased government effectiveness in public service provision. Instead, the effectiveness of government largely depends on the quality of human capital and institutions.

Nearly all countries worldwide are now experimenting with decentralization. Their motivation are diverse. Many countries are decentralizing because they believe this can help stimulate economic growth or reduce rural poverty, goals central government interventions have failed to achieve. Some countries see it as a way to strengthen civil society and deepen democracy. Some perceive it as a way to off-load expensive responsibilities onto lower level governments. Thus, decentralization is seen as a solution to many different kinds of problems. This report examines the origins and implications decentralization from a political economy perspective, with a focus on its promise and limitations. It explores why countries have often chosen not to decentralize, even when evidence suggests that doing so would be in the interests of the government. It seeks to explain why since the early 1980s many countries have undertaken some form of decentralization. This report also evaluates the evidence to understand where decentralization has considerable promise and where it does not. It identifies conditions needed for decentralization to succeed. It identifies the ways in which decentralization can promote rural development. And it names the goals which decentralization will probably not help achieve.

In practice, most education systems have both centralized and decentralized elements. Planners involved in a decentralizing reform must identify which components of the system are more appropriately managed at the central level and which at the local level. This book is intended to inform education policymakers, planners, and practitioners about international experience in the legal aspects of decentralizing basic education. It also provides a basic understanding of how laws and regulations can be used for education reform. For purposes of the discussion, decentralization is used to describe efforts to transfer decision making power in basic education from the administrative center of a country to authorities closer to users. The term is also used in a more technical sense to describe one of the many forms this type of reform can take, and in this sense it is contrasted with deconcentration and devolution as educational reforms. The first section examines the general legal aspects of decentralization, and the second looks more closely at decentralization laws and regulations. The third section is, in effect, a checklist of items that should be included in decentralization laws, and the fourth section provides a road map to help the planner prepare and implement the laws required for reform. Although an effort has been made to keep the discussion general enough for use in many countries, the analysis is based on the legal systems of the Western world or those that they inspired. (Contains 35 references.) (SLD)

Demand for decentralization is strong in most parts of the world. This close look at the negative side effects of improperly appled decentralization is not an attack on decentralization but an effort to prevent its misapplication -- and to promote fuller understanding and wiser use of this potentially desirable policy.