2003年-世界发展银行全球_Madagascar___Decentralization_110页_8mb

Summary of Report No. 25793-MAG: Madagascar Decentralization

Core Content

This report provides an analysis of Madagascar's decentralization process, focusing on the institutional and fiscal framework, challenges, and potential improvements. It highlights the political and structural constraints that have hindered the effectiveness of decentralization, particularly in the context of the country's centralized governance and fiscal system.

Main Points

Decentralization Context

• The early 1990s democratic transition provided the initial context for decentralization in Madagascar.
• Communes became the focal point of the decentralization strategy, and central ministries increased their local presence through administrative deconcentration.
• Despite several waves of decentralization, Madagascar remains a highly centralized country, both administratively and fiscally.

Institutional Framework

• The legal framework for decentralization includes the establishment of autonomous provinces and communes.
• The 1998 constitutional amendments introduced autonomous provinces, which were made effective through provincial elections and executive nominations.
• Communes are the only effective and viable sub-national layer of government, but they have been affected by political uncertainty and bargaining.

Fiscal Framework

• The central government collects over 97% of total revenues, with communes accounting for only 2-3%.
• Urban communes collect significantly more revenue than rural ones, with rural communes averaging only US$1 per capita per year.
• The majority of rural communes' budgets are funded by central government transfers, which are often delayed or inconsistent.

Challenges and Risks

• Structural constraints such as a low revenue base (9.6% of GDP) and a weak legal system limit the effectiveness of decentralization.
• The lack of clear roles and responsibilities between different levels of government has created confusion and tension.
• Full implementation of the 1998 decentralization strategy is considered risky due to the potential for re-centralization and fiscal instability.

Communes' Role

• Communes are crucial for local governance and service delivery, especially in rural areas.
• Sub-commune structures like Fokontany and Fokonolona can enhance service provision but must remain under commune authority to avoid undermining local autonomy.
• Communes are more efficient in collecting local revenues compared to deconcentrated intermediaries.

Recommendations

• Strengthening Communes: Focus on improving the financial and administrative capacity of communes.
• Efficient Revenue Collection: Communes should be responsible for collecting their own revenues, and the involvement of deconcentrated agents should be reduced.
• Predictable Transfers: Ensure timely and regular disbursement of transfers to communes to support planning and budgeting.
• Equal Transfer Allocation: Rural communes should receive at least the same per capita transfer as urban communes (FMG 8,800) to remove the artificial separation.
• Control and Coordination: Enhance control and coordination systems to support the deconcentrated framework before further decentralization.

Key Information

• Currency Equivalent: US$1 = FMG 6,077 (Effective October 23, 2003)
• Fiscal Year: January 1 - December 31
• Main Institutions:
  • Ministry of Decentralization
  • Ministry of Budget and Finance
  • Ministry of Interior
  • Ministry of Health
  • Ministry of Education
• Key Agencies and Partners:
  • World Bank
  • AfD (Agence Française de Développement)
  • Cooperation Francaise
  • UNDP
  • EU
  • GTZ
  • Norwegian Trust Fund
• Important Terms:
  • Deconcentration: Central government's extension of functions to local agents.
  • Decentralization: Transfer of authority and responsibility to lower levels of government.
  • Local Development Grant (LDG): A financial support mechanism for local governments.
  • Fiscal Gap: The difference between local needs and available revenues.
  • Transfer System: Central government's financial support to sub-national governments.

Conclusion

Madagascar's decentralization process, while initiated, has not led to substantial institutional change. The report emphasizes the need for a more realistic and prudent approach, focusing on strengthening the existing commune structure before pursuing further decentralization. It recommends improving revenue collection, ensuring predictable transfers, and enhancing control mechanisms to foster stability and efficiency in local governance.