2006年-世界发展银行全球_Ethiopia___Decentralization_Delivery_and_Accountability_41页_847kb

Ethiopia: Decentralization, Delivery and Accountability

I: Introduction

This document summarizes the findings of the Institutional and Governance Review (IGR) process in Ethiopia, which was part of the Public Sector Capacity Building Program (PSCAP). The IGR process, led by Navin Girishankar and supported by various experts, aimed to provide an overview of the impact of Ethiopia's decentralization reforms, particularly the 2002 decision to shift authority to lower tiers of government. The objective was to offer a qualitative understanding of the changes in local governance, highlight baseline benchmarking exercises, and explore how these can support accountability in the context of Ethiopia's political realities in 2006.

II: Decentralization: From Subject to Citizen

Transforming a Centralized Legacy

Ethiopia has a long history of centralized governance, dating back to its pre-colonial monarchy and the Marxist-Leninist Derg regime. The 1994 constitution marked a significant shift, introducing a framework for decentralization that allowed regions to retain the right to secede and devolved authority to regional and local levels. In 2002, this process was further deepened, with the introduction of unconditional bloc grants to woredas (local administrative units) to support their operations.

Some Achievements

Institutional Changes

1. Political Will: Strong political commitment exists at both federal and regional levels to empower woredas and grassroots institutions.
2. Budget Transfers: The 2002 reforms fully implemented the shift to unconditional bloc grants for woredas, which now receive over 60% of regional budgets.
3. Administrative Reforms: Zones, an intermediate administrative tier, have seen their authority significantly reduced, with staff largely transferred to woredas.
4. Capacity Building: Significant investments have been made in strengthening local government capacity through training and institutional support, including the establishment of a Ministry of Capacity Building.

Service Provision

• Education: The nationwide primary gross enrollment rate doubled from 37% in 1995/6 to 74% in 2004/5.
• Health: Immunization rates for children under five increased from 40% to 56% in the same period.
• Water and Sanitation: Access to safe drinking water rose from 19% to 36%.
• Citizen Satisfaction: A 2004 Citizens Report Card survey indicated high levels of satisfaction and consistent reports of service quality improvements in four regions.

Box 1: Ongoing Challenges in Decentralization

1. Clarify Expenditure Assignments: Responsibilities among different tiers of government remain unclear.
2. Local Revenue Sources: Urban municipalities need clearer revenue mechanisms and capacity to collect taxes.
3. Capital Expenditure: Strengthen local capacity for budgeting capital projects.
4. Conditional Grants: Clarify the role and modalities of rule-based conditional grants.
5. Audit Systems: Adapt audit systems to the new decentralized structure.
6. Fiscal Analysis: Enhance the capacity for subnational fiscal analysis.
7. Remote Woredas: Address the special capacity challenges of remote rural areas.

Additional policy challenges include:

8. Municipal Legal Frameworks: Establish a consistent legal framework for municipalities.
9. Decentralization Costs: Address the financial costs of decentralization, estimated at $500 million annually over 15 years.

How Much Change? A Local-Level Perspective

• Kebele Administration: Despite decentralization, kebeles remain the primary interface between the state and citizens, often exerting control over community labor and local activities.
• Community Contributions: In some regions, community labor and resources are still heavily used to supplement public services.
• Political Pluralism: Political pluralism has not yet taken root at the local level, with only a few areas reporting multiple political parties.
• Budgeting Changes: The 2002 reforms aimed to empower woredas through budget autonomy, but the actual budgetary capacity remains limited, with most funds allocated to recurrent expenditures.

III: Empowerment through Information – Benchmarking and Monitoring Institutional Change

The IGR process emphasized the role of benchmarking and monitoring in strengthening accountability. Key findings include:

• Baseline Benchmarking: Various benchmarking exercises were conducted to assess the impact of decentralization and to provide a basis for future monitoring.
• Local Participation: In Tigray, communities are increasingly involved in the planning process, with tabia (kebele) level input influencing woreda budget allocations.
• Flexibility in Budgeting: Some woredas have demonstrated flexibility in allocating budgets to capital projects, indicating progress in the decentralization process.

The document highlights that while there have been notable achievements in decentralization and service delivery, challenges remain in ensuring that local governments are truly empowered and that accountability is strengthened through effective monitoring and benchmarking.