2007年-世界发展银行全球_Kingdom_of_Lesotho_Local_Governance_Decentralization_and_Demand-Driven_Service_Delivery_Volume_2_Annexes_57页_795kb

Summary of the Document: Kingdom of Lesotho Local Governance, Decentralization and Demand-Driven Service Delivery

Core Content

This document is a draft report by the World Bank in collaboration with the Government of Lesotho, GTZ, and FAO, published on June 27, 2007. It focuses on the status and challenges of decentralization in Lesotho, particularly in the context of the Local Government Act 1997 as amended, and includes annexes that provide detailed assessments, literature reviews, legal recommendations, and implementation strategies. The report aims to evaluate the progress made in decentralization and to identify the key issues and recommendations for improving local governance and service delivery in the country.

Main Viewpoints

1. Historical Context of Decentralization

• Decentralization has been a central theme in Lesotho's post-independence development plans, including the Vision 2020 and National Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRSP).
• The concept of decentralization in Lesotho has evolved over time, starting with District Councils during colonial rule and later being abolished in 1968 by the BNP government due to political reasons and perceived inefficiency.
• A prefectorial model of administrative decentralization was introduced in 1969, with District Development Committees (DDCs) and Village Development Committees (VDCs).
• The military government introduced further decentralization efforts in the 1980s and 1990s, including the Maseru City Council (MCC), which was meant to be autonomous in urban governance.

2. Challenges in Decentralization

• Political interference has consistently undermined decentralization efforts, often leading to neopatrimonialism and hegemony.
• Lack of clarity in the roles, functions, and responsibilities of local authorities has caused conflicts and confusion between institutions.
• Institutional dualism between the central government and local governance structures has led to power struggles.
• Marginalization of chiefs has created tensions between traditional and modern governance systems.
• Insufficient financial decentralization and lack of capacity to manage resources and funds have hindered effective service delivery.
• Community apathy has been a result of the politicization of the decentralization process.
• Poor training and retention of qualified personnel at local levels has limited the success of local governance.
• Weak linkages between decentralization and other reform processes (e.g., public financial management) have contributed to the fragmented implementation of policies.

3. Decentralization Process and Phases

• The Local Government Act 1997 introduced a new structure for local governance, which was to be implemented in three phases:
  • Phase 1 (2004-2005): Transition phase, with a focus on institutional setup, capacity building, and legal amendments.
  • Phase 2 (2006-2011): Development phase, aimed at strengthening local governance and service delivery.
  • Phase 3 (2012-2016): Consolidation phase, for sustaining and institutionalizing the decentralization process.
• A Gantt chart and a budget of M43.4 million were proposed to guide the implementation.

4. Legal and Institutional Changes

• The Local Government Act 1997 was the main legal framework for decentralization.
• The Ministry of Local Government and Chieftaincy (MLGC) was responsible for implementing and monitoring the Act.
• Decentralization Sensitization Strategy (2005-2009) was introduced to increase awareness and acceptance among various stakeholders.
• The strategy included three phases: research, awareness, and persuasion, with the goal of achieving community, municipal, and district-level awareness and acceptance.

5. Implementation Status of the Act

• The implementation of the Local Government Act has been partially successful, with some provisions done or initiated, while others remain pending.
• Key actions have been taken, such as:
  • Declaration of councils
  • Establishment of committees (standing and special)
  • Setting up of council offices in some areas
  • Appointment of town clerks and council secretaries
  • Delegation of powers to local councils
  • Development of by-laws by Community Councils (CCs)
• However, several critical gaps persist, including:
  • Lack of clear legal amendments to the Act
  • Incomplete financial decentralization
  • Insufficient funding for council offices
  • Unclear separation of functions between local authorities and central ministries
  • Unimplemented by-laws and lack of formal approval and publication
  • Inadequate capacity to manage local finances and services
  • Weak community participation in decision-making

6. Recommendations

• Capacity building is essential for successful decentralization, including training and retention of qualified staff.
• Decentralization must be depoliticized to ensure genuine community participation and avoid centralist control.
• Clear legal frameworks and amendments are necessary to define roles and responsibilities.
• Financial decentralization should be prioritized to enable local authorities to manage their own budgets and funds.
• Traditional leadership should be integrated into the decentralization process to promote cooperative governance.
• Community engagement and awareness campaigns should be ongoing to ensure sustainable and inclusive service delivery.

Key Information

• Decentralization in Lesotho has a long history, dating back to colonial times, but has often been politically motivated.
• The BNP and military governments have centralized control, undermining the spirit of decentralization.
• The Local Government Act 1997 was a significant step, but its implementation has been slow and inconsistent.
• The Decentralization Sensitization Strategy (2005-2009) aimed to promote awareness and acceptance of the new governance model.
• The report highlights the need for a more inclusive, participatory, and legally sound approach to decentralization.
• Chiefs and traditional structures play a critical role, but have often been marginalized or conflicted with modern institutions.
• Community empowerment and multi-stakeholder dialogue are seen as key drivers of effective decentralization.
• Financial autonomy and budget decentralization are crucial for sustainable service delivery.
• Continuous evaluation and monitoring are necessary to ensure progress and accountability.

Conclusion

The report outlines the historical, legal, and institutional context of decentralization in Lesotho and identifies major challenges in its implementation. It calls for greater political will, legal clarity, capacity building, and community engagement to achieve effective and sustainable local governance. The recommendations emphasize the importance of depoliticization, institutional coordination, and financial autonomy in ensuring the success of decentralization.