-
DECENTRALIZATION, LOCAL
GOVERNANCE AND COMMUNITY
PARTICIPATION:
A CARIBBEAN PERSPECTIVE
PRESENTATION TO
CARIBBEAN SUB-REGIONAL FORUM ON
EFFECTIVE LOCAL GOVERNANCE: INNOVATIVE
APPROACHES TO IMPROVING MUNICIPAL
MANAGEMENT
MONTEGO BAY, JAMAICA
MAY 16-17, 2000
-
BY: KEITH L MILLER
INTRODUCTION
THE CARIBBEAN SUB REGION AND CARICOM
The Caribbean Sub-Region is internationally regarded as
comprising the string of islands stretching
from the Bahamas in the North-West to Trinidad & Tobago in
the South-East, as well as the
mainland countries of Belize in Central America and Guyana,
Surinam, and French Guyana on the
South American continent. The latter 3 countries and the Bahamas
are not physically located in, or
bordering on, the Caribbean Sea from which the Sub-Region
derives its name, but are traditionally
treated as part of the Caribbean.
Caribbean countries are all former colonies of European powers,
i.e. England, Spain, France, and
Holland. The USA joined this club towards the end of the
19th
century by assuming control of
Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands. Most Caribbean states have
now gained their independence, but
several remain colonies, or have been given some form of special
status as part of their metropolitan
country. Caribbean states vary in size and population, the
largest being Cuba with an area of 44,000
square miles and 10 million people. The vast majority however,
are small islands which fall within
the international definition of small or micro states. The
mainland states, while having relatively
large land areas, are very sparsely populated (e.g. Guyana with
a land mass of 215,000 sq km and a
population of 850,000), and therefore also fall within most
definitions of smallness.
It is the combination of small size, colonial heritage, relative
state of under-development and their
vulnerability to external forces such as globalization, which
characterize the countries of the Sub-
region, and provide the context for an examination of the
applicability and usefulness of concepts of
decentralization, local government and citizen/community
participation as being relevant to the
quest for development and good governance in the Sub-region. For
the purposes of this Paper
however, the focus of analysis will be on CARICOM member
states.
CARICOM (the acronym for Caribbean Common Market) is an economic
integration treaty
-
Page 3 of 27
embracing some 14 Caribbean countries. It is slated to become a
Single Market and Economy by
December 2000, and can be seen as a Caribbean response to the
global trend towards creation of
larger trading blocks, in order to provide larger markets for
local business-people. The majority of
members, and original signatories to the treaty, are the former
British colonies of Antigua/Barbuda,
Barbados, Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica,
Montserrat, St Kitts/Nevis, St
Lucia and Trinidad & Tobago. These have subsequently been
joined by Haiti and Surinam. The
Dominican Republic has been accorded observer status, and is now
seeking full membership.
-
Page 4 of 27
A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE ON DECENTRALIZATION
As the third millennium dawns, decentralization, enhancement of
local government and
participation of civil society in governance have become major
agenda items in discussions on
political/public administrative reform, and now command the
attention of major international
agencies, academicians and policy-makers throughout the world.
Heightened interest in these
inter-related concepts is driven by a growing imperative for
countries around the globe to find
ways to improve the quality of governance, deliver services in a
more cost effective and
responsive manner, and to reverse the growing alienation of
citizens from the electoral process.
Equally compelling is the fact than several global trends and
factors pose problems and
challenges which threaten to overwhelm the capacity of national
governments to find appropriate
responses. These point to the need for a paradigm shift in the
concept and practice of governance
and public administration, towards new approaches which can meet
those challenges. Factors
which drive the search for this new paradigm, and which while
being applicable to most
countries are particularly acute in respect to developing
countries, include the following:
1. Rapid population growth and urbanization will cause the urban
populations in developing
countries to more than double by 2050, as most of the expected
increase in world
population, from 6 to 12 billion, will occur in urban centres in
these countries. As a case
in point the urban population of Jamaica stood at 1,154,000 in
1991, and is projected to
rise to 2,642,000 by 2020, an increase of 120%. These nations
therefore face the uphill
task of providing, within 50 years, housing, infrastructure and
social services/ amenities
equivalent to what it has taken them centuries to provide for
their existing urban
populations.
2. Most developing nations have huge existing deficits in
providing basic social services for
their citizens. They therefore not only need to meet the demands
of rapidly expanding
urban populations, but also to make up on those deficits. High
levels of poverty;
inadequate/poorly maintained infrastructure, alarming levels of
environmental
degradation, lack of a social safety net for vulnerable groups;
lack of basic social
amenities, and poor planning, are symptomatic of conditions in
most of these urban
centres.
3. Growing concerns about environmental sustainability bring new
challenges to public
management and impose serious restraints on the development
agenda of developing
countries, as efforts to satisfy urgent socio-economic needs
must now be balanced by
concerns about environmental degradation. Potential and actual
impact of phenomena
-
Page 5 of 27
such as global climate change and natural disasters (e.g.
earthquakes, hurricanes, etc),
constitute special security concerns for small island states,
such as in the Caribbean.
4. Globalization and the accompanying communications/information
revolution have
sparked an explosion in expectations of the average citizen as
to the quality of life to
which they consider themselves entitled, and have made them
impatient in being able to
achieve it.
5. Increasing life expectancy in developing countries mean that
the phenomenon of rapidly
increasing aged populations is occurring at an earlier stage of
economic transformation
than was the case in developed countries, and simultaneously
with an explosion in their
youth population. Thus developing countries are having to cope
with problems associated
with phenomena related to both stages of development.
6. An increasingly assertive citizenry, bolstered by ready
access to information of public
affairs and of their rights and powers, is no longer prepared to
passively consent to
decisions handed down to them, or to accept choices made on
their behalf by leaders who
they see as being remote to their situation/concerns.
7. Extremely limited resources, on which there are competing
claims for social services,
national security, debt servicing, and developmental needs,
present difficult political
choices with attendant risks of social upheaval, particularly in
the context of widespread
alienation from the political process and mainstream society. In
such situations, a critical
requirement for effective political management, social cohesion
and building of social
capital, and for reconciling expectations/desires to available
resources, is the creation of
mechanisms for broad participation in decision-making about
national and local
priorities, and about the use of resources to meet those
priorities.
The nature and magnitude of challenges arising from these trends
and factors point to the need
for a model of governance and public management which emphasizes
local self-management and
greater participation of local stake-holders, to facilitate
innovative and problem-solving
approaches in these processes, and to ensure that policy
directions and initiatives adopted have
the support of key stakeholders, and benefit from the collective
wisdom of the community. Such
a model would also facilitate mobilization of local resources
(both financial and human) and
energies, which existing approaches are unable to do.
Decentralization, particularly through
stronger and more effective systems of Local Government, is an
essential element of such a
model.
-
Page 6 of 27
CARIBBEAN PERSPECTIVES ON DECENTRALIZATION
AND LOCAL GOVERNANCE
Caribbean States are classified as developing countries. They
face an urgent need to achieve
development and are subject to the trends identified above, and
therefore must be interested in
new models of governance/public management which promise to be
better able to respond to the
new challenges and to facilitate development. However, several
peculiar physical, historical,
socio-political and institutional factors have consequences for
decentralization and the viability
of local government in Caribbean states, given their size and
post-colonial character. These
concepts must therefore be assessed in the context of those
peculiar factors, to determine their
applicability and suitability to states with such
characteristics. Factors which are particularly
relevant include:
The Factor of Size: The major factor raised in respect to the
relevance of
decentralization and/or the viability of local government to
Caribbean states is that of
size. It is raised particularly in respect to smaller islands,
but have been advanced in the
case of the larger islands, which by world standards also
qualify as small states. Among
arguments advanced in support of the view that they are not
relevant are:
That the limited resource base of these economies cannot
maintain two levels of
government.
That the range and volume of public management tasks and
functions in these
small states are not sufficient to justify two distinct levels
of Government.
That most functions assigned to Local Government can be more
efficiently
performed centrally, because of economies of scale and more
effective use of
scarce trained/competent manpower.
That developments in communications/transportation have obviated
the original
justification for local government i.e. the
remoteness/inaccessibility of outlying
areas from the Capital.
Counter arguments to the above include the following:
It is precisely where resources are limited that the need for
local participation is
greatest, as this facilitates innovativeness & mobilization
of local resources and
contributions which would be unavailable to centrally directed
initiatives, and
-
Page 7 of 27
which add value to the development process.
Small size is relative. Countries with limited land
areas/populations operate
effective and viable local governments. Others have found that
advantages gained
through local self-management make it worthwhile to maintain
municipalities
with populations of a few thousand.
The much heralded economies of scale are often more theoretical
than real, as the
extended chain of command and remoteness from the action scene
which
characterizes centralized operations often result in poor
decision-making,
unresponsiveness, inability to effectively supervise or take
timely action, and an
absence of a sense of ownership.
The view that modern technology can satisfy the communication
needs of good
governance is predicated on a top-down, authoritarian approach
to the exercise of
political power. It assumes a one-way flow of information and
opinions, and
ignores the imperative of dialogue between the governors and the
governed as an
essential element of good governance in modern-day society.
The issue as to what constitute a minimum size at which a local
authority is viable is also
relative. While many contend that some local authorities in
Jamaica with populations of 70,000
are too small to be viable, Malta with 67 municipalities ranging
in population from 18,000 -
30,000, considers all of them to be viable. Sweden has
rationalized its local government system
over the past 50 years by reducing the number of municipalities
from 2,400 to 289, but still retain
municipalities with populations of 3,000, holding that they are
viable.
Inherited Model of Governance and Public Administration. English
speaking
Caribbean nations have inherited the Whitehall/Westminster Model
of governance/public
administration. There is much debate as to the continued
usefulness of the model to the
development needs and realities of these countries. Of immediate
interest to this
discussion however, is the implications and consequences of the
features of this model for
the process of, or prospects for, decentralization.
The Model is characterized by an over-centralization of state
functions and an
authoritarian approach to public management. Efforts at
decentralization are
therefore usually seen as threats to the control and status of
the centre, and are
treated with suspicion or even hostility. To the extent that
central bureaucracies
have had to accommodate Local Government systems, they have
sought to make
that institution subordinate or inferior.
The inherited model and colonial experience have produced a
cadre of public
administrators who are primarily status oriented, imitative and
reactive, rather
than achievement oriented, innovative problem-solving and
pro-active. This is
-
Page 8 of 27
characteristic of both central and local administrators, and
constitute major
concerns for a decentralization process aimed at creating local
capacity to take on
the challenges of locally led development.
Another characteristic of this model is that it marginalizes and
dis-empowers a
vast majority of the population, making them mere spectators in
the development
process. Deprived by the formal structures of opportunities to
contribute
positively to the society, their creativity, energies and
talents are often channeled
into a wide array of anti-social behaviors and attitudes.
Institutional Capacity. Weak capacity to respond to the
tasks/challenges of national
development, in the context of post-colonial state of
underdevelopment and recent
phenomena such as globalization, is a feature of the inherited
model. Over-centralization
is a major inhibitor to capacity development. Decentralization
provides a facilitating
framework for institutional development/capacity building, but
itself faces challenges
because of weak capacity at all levels, i.e. at national and
local government levels, and
among the key partners in the process of participatory
governance, such as civil society in
the form of non-governmental and community based organizations.
Institutional capacity
building issues include:
Enhancement of technical competence, professionalism, and
performance
orientation among the bureaucracy at both central and local
government levels,
and engendering a problem-solving, entrepreneurial, and customer
orientation
among this class.
Modernization of the public management apparatus, including
greater application
of technology and state on knowledge in the field.
Training and other HRD interventions, to enhance skills and
competencies
particularly in critical areas such as financial and project
management, social
mobilization and coalition building.
Establishment of institutional forms and structures to
facilitate the creation of
genuine and effective partnerships between government and civil
society,
Strengthening of organizational, leadership and problem solving
capacity among
community based and non-governmental organizations, and other
civil society
entities..
Traditional Role and Functioning of Local Government. The Model
of Government
instituted by colonial powers in their Caribbean territories
often included a local
government component. However, the type of local government
established was
fashioned on the then existing metropolitan model, and was
definitely not intended to be
-
Page 9 of 27
instruments of popular local expression or to promote
empowerment of the local
citizenry. Typical features of local government systems which
were established in the
sub-region, and which have survived and developed over time, are
illustrated by the
following:
Local Government in the early colonial to post-slavery eras was
totally controlled
by and served the interests of plantation owners and the landed
classes. Hostility
by Local Authorities to attempts by ex -slaves to establish free
villages/peasant
communities testify to this class interest.
Local Governments are subject to strong central control, and
usually require
approval from the Centre for most actions. This oftentimes lead
to decisions taken
by elected Councils or high level local officials being
over-ruled or thwarted by
low level functionaries in central ministries.
Local Authorities are subject to arbitrary Central Government
action, such as
dissolution of the elected Council or removal of subjects for
which they are
responsible, often without process, notice or any opportunity
for local
participation in or ability to influence the decision.
Central control over Local Authorities is further tightened by
excessive financial
dependence of Local Authorities on the Central Government.
Functions for which local government is responsible tend to be
limited, and vary
with countries. In larger states functions extend to sanitation,
road/drains, public
health, markets/abattoirs, and zoning control, while in smaller
states it is confined
to community related affairs and projects
Local Government is treated as an instrument for effecting
Central Government
programmes at the local level, or distributing scarce benefits
(pork barrel), rather
than as an instrument for local self-management and
self-expression. Essentially
therefore, the traditional relationship between Central and
Local Government has
been that of Principal/Agent.
Local Government is traditionally perceived as a provider of
specified local
services, rather than as having responsibility for overall
management of local
affairs within its jurisdiction.
Despite constraints and public dissatisfaction with its ability
to respond to local
needs, Local Government has acquired significant public support,
as illustrated by
the severe backlash against the Government in Jamaica, when that
it attempted to
dismantle Local Government in the 1980s.
Financing of Local Government/decentralized activities. Methods
for financing local
governments determine the effectiveness of a decentralized
system. Critical factors are
-
Page 10 of 27
whether Local Authorities are allocated independent sources of
revenue, and enjoy
relative autonomy in managing/controlling those sources. Another
key indicator is the
proportion of total public expenditure which is effected through
these bodies. Caribbean
experience to-date is that Central Governments have been
reluctant to concede any
significant degree of financial autonomy or clout to local
government. The following is a
brief overview of features/issues relating to financing of local
government in the region.
Local Governments are funded primarily by Central Government
Grants. This
approach to local government financing severely restricts the
role/responsibility of
local authorities in determining the level of revenues available
to them, and does
not encourage local initiatives in this regard. It also does not
enable local
authorities to predict the funding likely to be available to
them, and usually allows
little scope for local discretion in the use of funds at their
disposal.
Where Local Government is given its own specified revenue
sources, these are
usually managed by central agencies, and Local Authorities have
limited roles,
other than to receive the revenues.
Local Authorities have very limited or no scope for taking any
initiative to secure
financing for purposes which they deem necessary or desirable
for local
development or to satisfy local needs.
The percentage of national public expenditure effected through
local governments
in Caribbean states is generally less than 1%. Comparison show
that similar
figures for major world regions are:
-
Page 11 of 27
quality staff, and in providing relevant training for such
staff, are major impediments to
Local Government effectiveness in providing innovative responses
to local needs and
development challenges. Decentralization will create an even
greater need for high
quality staffing. Factors which contribute to this situation
include:
Local Governments are often staffed from the Central Government.
Where staff is
employed to a Local Government service, they are subject to
central control
regarding appointment and other employment issues. Local
Authorities thus have
no control over their staff and staffing issues.
Local Government is usually regarded as a backwater, and
conditions of
employment are less attractive than in the central service,
making it an
unattractive career choice for high achievers
.Local government bureaucrats show similar characteristics to
their central
government counter-parts, in terms of being predominantly status
oriented,
reactive and imitative.
Very limited resources, and a dearth of relevant training to
properly prepare them
for the task environment in which they function, are major
impediments to
development of a cadre of local government practitioners capable
of taking on the
challenges which face them. However, some initiatives in
developing such
training have been taken, including the following as
examples:
UWI has introduced Certificate in Local Government Studies at
St
Augustine, and with UTech is collaborating with the Government
of
Jamaica in developing a range of training programmes for
local
government personnel, including Councillors.
A number of international agencies, including the Organization
of
American States and Commonwealth Local Government Forum,
have
sponsored several regional seminars/ workshops for Mayors,
Councillors
and senior civil service/local government officials, to provide
training in
local governance issues, and facilitate an exchange of
views.
Effects of Globalization: Globalization has massively impacted
on Caribbean states in
many respects. Firstly, it poses a severe threat to many of the
critical industries and
trading relationships on which most countries in the region has
traditionally depended for
their economic survival. It has also facilitated deep cultural
penetration of the region,
which has the effect of changing traditional values, life styles
and patterns of
consumption, thus serving to undermine the social, cultural and
economic traditions in
the Caribbean. Globalization has also served to heighten the
expectations of the
population, and to promote greater assertiveness of citizens in
demanding that their voice
be heard, and in challenging authority.
-
Page 12 of 27
Regional integration is seen as a critical survival response by
Caribbean states to
globalization. At first sight this may seem to be in opposition
to a policy of
decentralization. However, to cope with the challenges and take
advantage of
opportunities presented by globalization, Caribbean states will
need to build social
capital, increase social cohesiveness and enhance the quality of
governance and public
management. Decentralization and participation are essential
elements in achieving those
outcomes, and therefore must be seen as complementary rather
than contradictory to the
process of integration.
DEFINITION OF TERMS AND SOME CONCEPTUAL ISSUES
DECENTRALIZATION
Decentralization is the transfer of state/public functions from
central to sub-national levels of
government, or from central agencies/offices to regional bodies
or local offices, or non-
governmental organizations. It is also defined as the
redefinition of structures, procedures and
practices of governance to be closer to the citizenry, and can
take the form of deconcentration,
delegation or devolution. Deconcentration is the delegation of
administration functions to
regional/local offices, without transfer of political power.
Delegation entails the transfer of
responsibility for specified functions and associated authority
to organizations outside of or
indirectly controlled by government. Devolution involves the
transfer of functions and
responsibility to sub-national Authorities or levels of
government which are largely independent
of central government control, and involves the delegation of
political authority.
Divestment/privatization is sometimes treated as a separate form
of decentralization, while
deconcentration and delegation are grouped as a single form
called Administrative
decentralization. The purpose of this Paper is not however to
discuss the relative merits of
different definitions or views of decentralization. It suffices
to say that in this Paper, the term will
generally be used to mean devolution.
Devolution is the form of decentralization most conducive to
development of strong autonomous
systems of local government. It facilitates the empowerment of
communities and the
participation of civil society in the process of governance, and
attains its highest point when the
scope of local government extends beyond being a mere service
provider, to embrace overall
responsibility for local self management and development. In
this mode it assumes the lead role
in forging strong horizontal integration at the local level, and
building alliances between all local
-
Page 13 of 27
stakeholder groups; and it also coordinates the activities and
programmes of all entities
operating within its jurisdiction, including central agencies,
civil society, communities, CBOs
and NGOs.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT V.S. LOCAL GOVERNANCE
It is important to distinguish between the terms local
government and local governance. The
former refers to the institution/structure which conduct
governmental functions at the local level,
while the latter is the process through which public choice is
determined, policies formulated, or
decisions are made and executed at the local level, and the
roles and relationships between the
various stakeholders or interest groups in this process. This
distinction is important in discussing
the relevance of decentralization in the region, because of the
need to realize that many of the
principles, concepts and objectives of participatory local
governance are relevant and can be
realized even in the absence of a formal local government
system..
CENTRALIZATION V.S. DECENTRALIZATION
Centralization and Decentralization are frequently juxtaposed as
tendencies which are inimical to
each other, i.e. that adoption of a policy of decentralization
must inevitably result in diminution
of the centre in terms of size, scope and importance. While it
is axiomatic that devolution entails
a significant transfer of power to the sub-national level, this
does not necessarily mean a
reduction in the scope or importance of the centre. What it
entails is a redefinition of roles and
relationships. In fact, if decentralization is not lead to chaos
and other dys-functional
developments, it is essential that certain central functions be
significantly enhanced. These
include the development of a comprehensive national policy
framework which, while allowing
adequate scope for local governments to adopt strategies which
reflect local conditions and
preferences, will ensure broad coherence and direction in
respect to national development. Other
central functions which also need to be strengthened include
coordination, monitoring and
evaluation, setting national standards and specifications, and
research.
THE PRINCIPLE OF SUBSIDIARITY
This principle posits that responsibility/authority for any
task/function should be assigned ton the
lowest level at which it can be effectively performed, or to the
level nearest to the persons
directly impacted by it. It provides a very useful guideline for
determining the distribution of
responsibilities for state/public functions between the
national, sub-national and community
-
Page 14 of 27
levels of administration, in a decentralized system of
governance.
REVIEW OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN CARICOM STATES
There are wide variations among countries in the Caribbean
sub-region regarding the history and
present status of Local Government. Differences can be
attributed to several factors, including
size and population, the dominant colonial power, and past and
contemporary political
developments which have favored movements either towards or away
from decentralized
approaches to governance. The following is an attempt to present
a broad categorization into
which Caribbean states can be grouped, based on their historical
and contemporary experience
with local government. This is followed by brief
summaries/assessments of the situation in each
CARICOM state (A tabular presentation of this information can be
found in Appendix One):
Countries in which a system of local government has never
existed, and in which there is
little interest in or disposition toward adopting a formal local
government system in the
foreseeable future.
Countries which in the past have had a system of local
government, but has since
abolished the institution, and which show little interest in or
disposition toward reviving
the system.
Countries in which there are official local government systems
on the Books (i.e. by
statute or in the Constitution), but the system has either been
suspended or is non-
functional. In some of these states there are credible efforts
towards restoring the system,
while in others such efforts are ambivalent.
Countries in which no local government system previously
existed, but which in recent
years have established such systems, or are in the process of
doing so.
Countries which have had a long tradition of local government,
some of these having
been in existence for over 300 years, and which continue to
support strong local
government systems..
There are several cases of twin-island states (i.e. unions
between two main islands of
unequal size). Antigua/Barbuda, St Kitts/Nevis and Trinidad
& Tobago are such cases.
Constitutions of these states usually confer a degree of local
autonomy to the smaller
island, and this is seen as constituting a form of local
self-government, in addition to any
other system which might exist for the entire nation.
1. ANTIGUA & BARBUDA
Local Government in Antigua/Barbuda consists of District
Councils. The Districts coincide with
the 16 political constituencies. The system is by administrative
decree rather than by legislation,
-
Page 15 of 27
and Councils are nominated rather than elected. District
functions of are confined to community
activities and projects, and promoting volunteerism. Current
efforts to enhance Local
Government consist of giving the District Councils a larger role
in disaster management, through
rekindling the spirit of cooperation. The Antigua/Barbuda
Constitution confers substantial local
autonomy on Barbuda, and this is regarded as a form of local
government.
2. THE BAHAMAS
The Bahamas did not have any form of Local Government until
1996, when such a system was
established by Act of Parliament. The system introduced then
consisted of 23 District Councils
covering the 29 inhabited islands (out of a total of 700
islands, cays and reefs which comprise the
Bahamas). The number of Districts has subsequently been
increased to 31 by an amendment to
the Local Government Act in 1999. Local Authorities are funded
by grants from Central
Government, and are responsible for upkeep of roads, harbours,
parks, and public buildings,
public transportation and development of youth and culture.
Reform and further strengthening of
local government is being pursued by way of review of the Local
Government Act.
3. BARBADOS
Barbados does not have a local government system, as this level
of government was abolished
some years ago. Proposals for the re-introduction of this
institution has been made in several
constitutional review exercises, but none of these have been
adopted, and there is no active effort
to restore it. Nonetheless, Barbados has attempted to provide
mechanisms to facilitate local
participation in addressing local issues through the
establishment of Urban and Rural
Development Commissions
4. BELIZE
There is a vibrant local government system in Belize, and
significant initiatives have been
undertaken in recent years to enhance this system. This process
is continuing. Initiatives include
legislative reform to give greater autonomy to Local
Authorities; capacity building programmes
to strengthen policy-making and managerial competence/systems;
and expanding the role of
municipalities in the provision of services and public
amenities.
Local Government takes the form of 6 District Councils and 9
municipalities (2 cities and 7
towns), but these do not cover the entire land space of Belize.
Councils of the Local Authorities
are democratically elected..
5. DOMINICA
-
Page 16 of 27
Dominica has a strong tradition in respect to Local Government,
and the commitment to this
institution is continuing. The present system is based on Town,
Village and District Councils,
which are comprised of a mix of elected and nominated members.
It is established by Act of
Parliament, and its main functions relate to the management of
community affairs, project
implementation and community self-help. Local Government Reform
is currently under
consideration, and this might facilitate greater participation
of civil society in governance.
6. GRENADA
Grenada has a quite advanced system of Local Government
entrenched in its Constitution.
However this has been suspended since 1983, and therefore there
is no functional local
government at this time. While statements have been made in
respect to restoration of some form
of local government, there has been no clear indication as to
when the institution will be restored.
At present efforts in this direction is focused on granting some
form of local government to
Carriacou and Petit Martinique, which are two small islands that
form part of Grenada.
7. GUYANA
Guyana has a very elaborate system of local government, which is
entrenched in the Constitution.
The various levels include County, Regional, City & Town,
District and Amerindian Councils,
which are all democratically elected. There is also provision
for Village Councils, neighborhoods
and peoples cooperative units. Not all of these are fully
established however. Local Authorities
are financed primarily from their own sources of revenue, as
Central Government subventions
have dried up because of the financial situation. The present
arrangements do not yield adequate
revenues to meet mandated responsibilities. While some Councils
enjoy a degree of autonomy,
approval of the Minister is still required for many actions,
e.g. appointment/control of staff, etc.
8. HAITI
Haiti had no form of local government prior to 1987, when the
new Constitution established a
very elaborate and sophisticated system consisting of 4
hierarchical levels of Local Authorities -
i.e. 9 Departments, 41 Arrondissements, 133 Communes and 564
Communal Sections.
Theoretically, these enjoy substantial financial and
administrative autonomy from Central
Government. So far, this system has not been operationalized,
and in fact while Mayors have
been elected they have no administrative support and therefore
are unable to function. In the
meantime, local services are being administered by officials
appointed by the President and
controlled by the Ministry of the Interior and Local Government.
Many observers are of the view
that Haiti does not have the culture, history or resources
(financial and human) to operate such an
-
Page 17 of 27
elaborate and sophisticated system.
Prior to 1987, control of the countryside was effected, under
the Code Rural of 1862", by
chiefs of section who were army auxiliaries instructed and
trained to block and repress any
claims/rights of the rural population. This approach to dealing
with the rights, interests and needs
of local people would certainly have become entrenched in the
culture of public management
after more than a century of practice, and will certainly prove
to be a major impediment to
achieving the admirable goals of the new local government
system.
9. JAMAICA
Jamaica has had almost 350 years tradition in having a local
government system in place , and
this has served to create a strong culture of local
administration. There have been fundamental
changes to the system since it was first introduced shortly
after the British capture of the island in
1655. The present structure of local government consist of 13
Local Authorities - 12 Parish
Councils and 1 Municipal Authority (Kingston). Further details
on the Jamaican local
government system is provided in the Case Study on Local
Government Reform.
10. ST. KITTS/NEVIS
St Kitts/Nevis does not have a formal local government system
for the country as a whole.
However, it is one of those twin island states in which the
Constitution confers substantial local
autonomy for the smaller partner in the union, which in this
case is Nevis.
11. ST LUCIA
Local Government was introduced in St Lucia in 1947 under 2 Acts
of Parliament. The system
consist of 1 City Council, 3 Town Councils and 6 Village
Councils, which are normally made up
of elected members. However, elections have been suspended since
1979 and therefore the
membership of Councils are presently nominated. Local
Authorities are funded entirely by grants
from Central Government, and at present expenditure by these
Authorities constitute
approximately 0.5% of gross annual public expenditure. St Lucia
is currently engaged in a
comprehensive review of local government, with the intention of
carrying out substantial
reforms.
12. ST VINCENT & THE GRENADINES
St Vincent and the Grenadines have no existing local government
system. However, that country
-
Page 18 of 27
has attempted to introduce some element of citizen participation
in governance through the
establishment of a Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
system, which is intended to provide
local communities with the opportunity to be involved in all
stages of the project cycle.
13. SURINAME
Local Government was introduced into Suriname in June, 1989 by
means on the new
Constitution and by Act of Parliament. The system is based on
District Councils, whose
membership are partially elected and partially nominated. The
Local Authorities have
responsibility for a range of functions, including waste
disposal, maintenance of secondary and
tertiary roads, public markets, public guest houses, and
procurement of licences.
They are funded primarily by Central government grants, and
expenditure by these Authorities
constitute about 1% of gross annual public expenditure. A number
of measures have been put in
place to encourage/facilitate the participation of civil society
in governance, including a
provision that District Ordinances drafted by the District
Councils must be open to public
discussion, and objections can be lodged to the National
Assembly by citizens.
14. TRINIDAD & TOBAGO
Trinidad and Tobago has one of the oldest traditions of local
government in the Caribbean. The
institution was first introduced to the island in 1596 by the
Spanish. However the modern system
is dated back to 1768. The present system is established by Act
of Parliament, and consist of
Municipal and Regional Corporations, and the Tobago House of
Assembly which has special
status. These authorities are controlled by democratically
elected members, and are funded by
Central government grants and locally derived rates, user
charges and licence fees, with central
government grants making up as high as 80% of the funding of
municipalities. Trinidad and
Tobago has initiated several measures to expand the scope of
local government, including
making them responsible for the administration of unemployment
benefits.
A CARIBBEAN CASE STUDY:
LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM IN JAMAICA
BACKGROUND AND BRIEF HISTORY
This case illustrates a Caribbean approach to decentralization,
the role of local government in
managing local affairs, participation of civil society in local
governance, financing of local
government and institutional capacity building. Local Government
in Jamaica dates back to just
-
Page 19 of 27
after its British capture in 1655. Development of the
institution over the years, and its features,
reflect the patterns and characteristics symptomatic of
Caribbean local governments. Several
Studies/Reports on Local Government Reform have been
commissioned over the past 60 years,
the first being the Hill Report of 1943. These have been largely
ignored. The current Programme
constitute the first attempt at meaningful reform of Local
Government. In 1985 however, the then
Government - citing incompetence and mismanagement, virtually
dismantled the local
government system. The Municipal Authority for Kingston was
dissolved, and most local
government functions were transferred to central agencies.
Strong public backlash against this
move contributed to the loss of power by the government in 1989.
The new government came to
power on a platform which included the restoration/reform of
local government
Objectives of the Local Government Reform Programme (LGRP)
The focal objective of Local Government Reform, as outlined in
Ministry Paper 8 in 1993, is to
bring about a fundamental transformation in the process of local
governance, by facilitating
greater self-management of local affairs, and by creating a
decentralized system of Local
Government which would facilitate the active and direct
participation of civil society in the
process of local governance. Four major objectives were
enunciated:
To deepen and broaden the democratic process
To facilitate the active participation of citizens in the
management of local affairs.
To ensure the provision of local services which are of a high
quality, cost effective and
are responsive to the needs of citizens.
To achieve a better division of labour between Central and Local
Government, in which
the Centre will focus on national policy making, planning,
setting standards and macro
issues, while Local Government will be responsible for
operations/implementation at the
local level and for micro issues.
Six main areas of reform were identified as being essential for
realizing the objectives set out
above
1. Financial Reforms: Targeted outcome here is to reverse the
excessive financial
dependence of Local Authorities on Central Government, and to
eventually take local
government off the national budget. To achieve this goal
independent sources of revenue
have been allocated to Local Authorities, and they are being
assisted to boost own-source
revenues and generally improve their revenue/financial
management capabilities. As a
result of these initiatives, Local Government now derives 61% of
its revenues from
sources allocated to it, whereas prior to reforms 95% of their
funding came from Central
-
Page 20 of 27
Government.
2. Legal Reform. This involves modernizing the legal framework
of Local Government by
revising or re-writing the more than 100 Acts of Parliament
which make up the legal
framework of local government. The main thrust of these reforms
is to give Local
Authorities greater autonomy; remove the powers of Central
Government to arbitrarily
dissolve/dismantle local governments; make the laws more
relevant to modern realities;
and to have Local Government entrenched in the Constitution when
this is revised..
3. Institutional Upgrading/Capacity Building: this involves
modernizing and upgrading
the institutional capacity of Councils by enhancing their
organizational structures; giving
them additional high level staff; improving management systems,
instituting a
comprehensive HRD programme, including training for Councilors;
and by upgrading
their physical facilities and computerizing their
operations.
4. Revision of the role of Local Authorities and relationships
between all the major actors,
interest groups and stakeholders in the local government system.
This includes shifting
the focus of Local Authorities away from being merely providers
of certain specified
local services, to having broad responsibility for managing the
affairs of the Parish, and
charting its course of development.
5. Upgrading the quality of services delivery and infrastructure
management. The
focus here is to improve the quality, cost-effectiveness and
responsiveness of services
provided by Local Authorities, and the management and
maintenance of local
infrastructure. To achieve this, and to rehabilitate local
infrastructure which had become
severely deteriorated, Government has initiated a US$50 million
Parish Infrastructure
Development Project, which will be available to carry out such
works in all Parishes.
6. Participation of Civil Society in Governance:
Mechanisms/strategies to facilitate the
participation of civil society in governance, and forge strong
partner relationships
between Local Authorities and communities/civil society has been
a key part of reform.
Initiatives to achieve these goals include:
Establishing a National Advisory Council on Local Government
Reform (NAC),
with represent-atives from major political parties, Trade
Unions, the Church, and
major interest groups as well as noted scholars and
practitioners. This helped to
win broad-based support for the Programme.
Parish Advisory Committees similar in composition and purpose to
the NAC,
were set up in each Parish. These have been replaced by Parish
Development
-
Page 21 of 27
Committees (PDCs) comprising all public agencies operating at
Parish level,
community/civil society leaders, NGOs and the private sector in
the Parish. It
works with Local Authorities in formulating Development Plans
and coordinating
private/public sector initiatives in economic growth for the
Parish. PDCs helps to
monitor service delivery and ensure accountability of
Authorities to citizens.
Some Councils have begun the practice of presenting their annual
budgets to the
public in their respective Parishes, to provide opportunities
for citizens to critique
it and make suggestions.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Caribbean face critical challenges in overcoming its legacy
of under-development and
vestiges of colonial heritage. Additionally, several global
trends portend new challenges for
governance in the developing world, and in particular, for
small, post-colonial island states.
Fundamental overhaul of inherited models of governance /public
management in the region is
essential for successfully meeting these challenges.
Decentralization, citizen participation in local
governance, and an enhanced role for local government in local
self-management/local
development, constitute key elements of a new paradigm of
governance which must be embraced
by the region, if the goals of social transformation and
economic development are to be realized.
Presently however, rhetoric on this subject far exceed the
limited and tentative measures which
have been initiated to bring these principles into the
day-to-day practice of government.
Interventions to galvanize this process is an urgent
priority.
Absence of an appropriate policy framework for advancing the new
paradigm is a major
contributor to the slow progress in moving the model from
conceptual acceptance to wider
application. Formulation of a Regional Policy and Strategic Plan
of Action on decentralization,
local governance and citizen/community participation should
therefore make a major
contribution towards inculcating these principles and concepts
into the processes of governance
in the sub-region. Such a policy framework would help to clarify
several issues and provide a
clear frame of reference as to what ought to constitute a
properly functioning local government
system, in the context of Caribbean needs and realities. Most
importantly, it would encourage
and assist individual countries to formulate their own national
policies on the subject, within the
broad parameters of the regional policy, but reflecting the
realities and inclinations of their own
situation.
Key issues and features which a Regional Policy and Strategic
Plan of Action should give special
focus to, and/ or address and promote, include the
following:
-
Page 22 of 27
Strong encouragement for member states to embrace local
government systems which are
democratic, participatory, have appropriate legal (preferably
constitutional) standing,
enjoy autonomy in respect to local affairs, and enjoy
independent revenues/resources,
commensurate with their mandated functions
Recognition that for a variety of reasons, classical models of
local government or
orthodox approaches to decentralization might not be
feasible/appropriate for several
member states. Policy options, which while promoting the
principles of decentralization
and participation of civil society in governance, do not
necessarily require the existence
of formal local government systems, must therefore be
explored.
Devising financing models which offer real financial autonomy to
local government is
critical to enabling local authorities to respond to local
needs/priorities, and apply
innovative solutions to local problems. Improving the financial
management capability of
these authorities, and establishing mechanisms to ensure their
public accountability to the
local community, must be essential components of such
models.
Promoting a policy of increasing local governments share of
gross public revenue! The
share of the national pie which is controlled at the local level
is a measure of the ability of
local decision-makers to respond to local needs and priorities,
and also to effectively plan
for, and take action to initiate, local development. Equally,
the economic strength of sub-
national units of government is an indication of their capacity
to respond to local
investment opportunities and initiatives, and take the lead in
creating a vibrant local
economy. Such a policy is therefore vital if local authorities,
along with their local private
sector and civil society partners, are to take on the role of
initiating locally led
development/wealth creation, and forging a third economy - i.e.
local job
creation/expansion of economic opportunities outside of normal
private sector and
traditional public sector activities. Measures which could help
to increase the share of
total public revenue available to local government include the
following:
Encouraging local authorities to generate surpluses from their
recurrent revenue
sources, to be used to finance local capital projects.
Curtail the practice of using special purpose central agencies
to undertake capital
works in local jurisdictions, rather than channeling funds to
local authorities for
executing such works.
Transfer more functions which are now performed nationally,
e.g.
repair/maintenance of schools, public building situated within
the various local
jurisdictions, to the respective local authorities.
Adopt revenue-sharing policies, particularly for revenue earned
from activities
which have high impact on local communities, or require high
levels of local
-
Page 23 of 27
inputs/support (e.g. tourism, mining)
Redefining the role/scope of local government, from being mere
providers of local
services to assuming responsibility for the holistic management
of local affairs and local
development planning and economic growth. In this new
dispensation, local government
becomes the vehicle through which the local people are empowered
to take charge of
their own affairs, and plan their future. This requires a
framework for citizens/civil
society to become involved in the decision-making process, and
in innovative approaches
to solving local problems, based on local knowledge and choice
as regards needs and
priorities.
Place strong emphasis on capacity building/human resource
development as essential pre-
requisites for adoption of a decentralized, participatory model
of local governance.
Enhanced capacity is required for all key sectors and players in
this process, including
central and local government political leaders and
bureaucracies, community/civil society
organizations and leaders, the private sector and NGOs. HRD is a
key element of capacity
building, as are appropriate technology and modern management
practices.
Regional universities/tertiary institutions should be enlisted
to develop/expand the range
and relevance of training available to prepare policy makers and
practitioners in the
region to take up the challenge of pursuing national development
through decentralized
and participatory models of governance. This should include
encouragement of research
and scholarship in these areas, to expand knowledge and
understanding of
decentralization, local government and participation processes
in a Caribbean context..
Encourage regional Governments to undertake a comprehensive
review of the distribution
of functions between the various levels of government, with a
view to ensuring that
responsibility for these functions are allocated to the level
which is most conducive to
efficiency and responsiveness to citizens needs and choices.
Application of the principle
of subsidiarity in such exercises should be strongly
advocated.
Support strengthening of Regional and National associations of
Local Government
Authorities, NGOs, CBOs and civil society organizations, to
enable them to more
effectively promote, lobby for and represent local government
and community interests
in the region. Development of strong networking links with
international local
government and NGO/civil society associations should help to
strengthen their regional
counterparts, and provide channels for the exchange of
experiences and best practices.
Seek recognition for Local Government and Community Affairs
(which includes the role
-
Page 24 of 27
of civil society in governance), to be regarded as a distinct
sub-sector, and treated
accordingly. This can be achieved by inclusion of the subject on
the Agenda of Caricom
Heads of Government Meetings, and establishment of a Caricom
Ministers Meeting for
this subject, to give focus to the issues of decentralization,
strength-ening of local
government, civil society participation in governance, and
empowerment of communities.
This would provide a regional forum to develop and pursue
strategies for advancing the
sub-sector.
Promulgation of a Regional Policy and Strategic Plan of Action
as proposed will depend firstly
on recognition by regional governments of the critical role
which this sub-sector can play in
addressing many deficiencies in the current practice of
governance and public management in the
region, and therefore the need to develop clear policy positions
on the issues involved. It will also
require collaboration and support from relevant regional
institutions, and from international
agencies which have been active in sponsoring local government
reform and community
participation initiatives in the region. Participation in this
process of groups throughout the
region which have an interest in the issues is essential. The
following would assist in moving this
idea forward.
1. Identification of a lead agency which will spearhead
preparation of the policy. The
Caricom Secretariat and/or the UWI would be the best candidates
for this role.
2. Endorsement of the exercise by Caribbean governments,
probably through the Caricom
Heads of Government Meeting. This could be facilitated by the
preparation of a project
proposal which would be reviewed by the major stakeholders, and
then submitted to the
Heads for their consideration
3. Support from regional tertiary institutions in respect to
research and scholarship; and
from associations of local government authorities and civil
society organizations in the
region.
4. International agencies involved in promoting good governance
and democratic values
should find this a very worthwhile effort to support. The
outcome should provide them
with an excellent framework to determine future support in this
area, as well as ensure
coherence and avoid duplication and/or gaps.
APPENDIX ONE STATUS OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN CARICOM-MEMBER
STATES
-
Page 25 of 27
Country
Existing form of
Local Govt
Legal
Framework
Active LG/Decent.
Reform Initiative
Intended legal status
of reformed LG
Antigua/Barbuda
*
District Councils #
Administrative
Decree
Yes
No change to existing
legal status
Barbados
None
N/A
No
None
Bahamas
District Councils
(based on islands)
Act of Parliament
Yes
Review of existing
Act of Parliament
Belize
City & Town
Councils
Act of Parliament
No
N/A
Dominica
District Councils
Act of Parliament
Yes
Not Determined
Grenada
Non operational
Constitution
Under review
Guyana
Multi-tiered
Constitutional
No
N/A
Haiti
Multi-tiered
Constitution
No
N/A
Jamaica
Municipal and
Parish Councils
Act of Parliament
Yes
Constitution
St Kitts/Nevis*
None
St Lucia
Suspended
Acts of
Parliament
Yes
Act of Parliament
St Vincent/
Grenadines*
District Councils
Administrative
Decree
No
N/A
Trinidad/Tobago*
Regional & Muni-
cipal Corporations
Act of Parliament
No
N/A
* These are twin island states whose Constitutions give some
form local autonomy to the
smaller island.
# Districts are the administrative divisions into which several
islands are divided for the
purposes of local level administration. The District Councils
are the bodies established to
direct and have responsibility for such functions and tasks
which are carried out at the
-
Page 26 of 27
District level. Members are usually nominated by Central
Government, but in some
instances are comprised of both nominated and elected
members.
APPENDIX TWO
STATISTICS ON MEMBER COUNTRIES OF CARICOM
Country Size (Sq.
Km)
Population
Official
Language
Colonial Power
Present Political
Status
Antigua/Barbuda
442
68,612(96)
English
British
independ. Nov.
1981
Barbados
431
265,918(96)
English
British
independ. Nov.1996
Bahamas
13,864
283,901(96)
English
British
independ. July 1973
Belize
21,500
238,500
English
British
Parliamentary
democracy
Dominica
288.9
72,000(96)
English
British
independ/Republica
n system
Dominican Rep.
48,442
8,000,000
Spanish
Spain
Independent
Grenada
345
120,000
English
British
Independent
Guyana
215,083
850,000
English
British
Independent
Haiti
27,400
8,500,000
French
French
Independent 1802
Jamaica
10,991
2,553,496(97)
English
Spanish/British
independ.Aug.1962
Montserrat
103
10,608(95)
English
British
Colony
St Kitts/Nevis
269
42,280(96)
English
British
independ Sep. 1983
St Lucia
616
154,000
English
French/British
independ. Feb. 1979
St Vincent/Grenadines
389
111,214(96)
English
French/British
independ. Oct.1979
Suriname
163,820
408,041(95)
Dutch
Dutch
independ./Republic
Nov. 1975
-
Page 27 of 27
Country
Size (Sq.
Km)
Population
Official
Language
Colonial Power
Present Political
Status
Trinidad/Tobago 5,182 1,263,616(96) English French/British
independ./Republic
Aug. 1962