Education Decentralization in Africa: a typology and Review of Recent Practice

Mozambique

World Bank (1999). Mozambique: Education Sector Strategic Program Project ESSP: Project Appraisal Document. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Nigeria

Francis, Paul A. (1998). Hard Lessons: Primary Schools, Community, and Social Capital in Nigeria. World Bank Technical Paper No. 420. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Government of Nigeria (2001). Education for All (EFA) in Nigeria. Lagos: Federal Republic of Nigeria. August.
Hinchliffe, Keith (2002). Nigeria: Public Expenditures on Education: Issues, Estimates, and Some Implication. Washington, DC: The World Bank, Africa Region Human Development Working Paper Series.
World Bank (2000). Nigeria: Second Primary Education Project: Project Appraisal Document. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Senegal

World Bank (2000). Senegal: Quality Education for All Project: Project Appraisal Document. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

South Africa

Sayed, Yusuf (2002). Democratising Education in a Decentralised System: South African Policy and Practice. Compare, Vol. 32, No. 1.

Tanzania

Galabawa, Justinian CJ (2001). Developments and Issues Regarding Universal Primary Education (UPE) in Tanzania, Paris: Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA).

McLean Keith, Characterizing Decentralization in Tanzania, mimeo, World Bank, Washington DC, 1997

Therkildsen, Ole (1998). Local Government and Households in Primary Education in Tanzania: Some lessons for Reform. Denmark: CDR Working Paper 98.6, June,1998 www.cdr.dk
World Bank (2001). Primary Education Development Program Project—PAD, Washington, DC: The World Bank, Report No. P7466 TA, August 22.
Uganda

Ablo, E. and R. Reinikka (1998). Do Budgets Really Matter? Washington DC: The World Bank, WPS #1926.

Azfar, Omar, Satu Kähkönen, Jeffrey Livingston, Patrick Meagher, Diana Rutherford (2000). Making Decentralization Work: An Empirical Investigation of Governance and Public Services in Uganda. IRIS Center, University of Maryland, College Park, December 18.

Monyonyo, Remigius (1999). Decentralization in Uganda: Theory and Practice. Uganda Martyrs University, Nkozi, Institute of Ethics and Development Studies, African Researcher Monograph Series, African Research and Documentation Centre, No. 5.

Reinikka, R. (2000). Recovery in Service Delivery: Evidence from Schools and Clinics. Washington DC: The World Bank.

World Bank (n.d.). Uganda: Tracking Public Expenditures (PETS). Washington DC: The World Bank, Civic Engagement in Public Expenditure Management

Case Studies,

World Bank (n.d.). Uganda: Tracking Public Expenditures (PETS). Washington DC: The World Bank, Civic Engagement in Public Expenditure Management

Case Studies, accessed 8/5/02. http://www.worldbank.org/wbi/urban/docs/KampalaCaseDecentralisation%20Mwesigye.pdf

World Bank (2002). Uganda - Decentralized Service Delivery Makerere University Training Pilot Project: Project Appraisal Document. Washington DC: The World Bank, Report No: 23762-UG

Zambia

World Bank (1999). Zambia: Basic Education Subsector Investment Program Support Project BESSIP: Project Appraisal Document. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Zimbabwe

Cowden, E.M., Chikombah, Boniface R.S. Chivore, Obert E. Maravanyika,

Levi M. Nyagura and Isiah M. Sibanda (1999). Review of Education Sector Analysis

in Zimbabwe 1990-1996. Paris: ADEA and UNESCO, Working Group on Education Sector Analysis.
.

1 USAID, Africa Bureau, Education Decentralization in Africa, 1997

2 Jee-Peng Tan, A. Soucat and A. Mingat, Enhancing Human Development in the HIPC/PRSP Context: Progress in the Africa Region During 2000, The World Bank, 2001. It is interesting to note that national income and government educational spending and fiscal effort are not as tightly coupled as one might expect. In fact the relationship in Africa appears weak (Graph Annex). However, taken separately both government spending and national income are both related to key educational outcome indicators in the EFA context, such as Gross Primary Enrollment Rates (Graphs XXX). Saying that relatively wealthier countries have better enrollment rates is not particularly helpful. But recognizing that increased governmental effort can improve enrollment rates is.

3 Alain Mingat, R. Rakotomalala, and J. Tan, Financing Education for All by 2015 in Africa: Simulations for 33 Countries, The World Bank, Africa Region, 2002.

4 World Bank, A Chance to Learn: Knowledge and Finance for Education in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2001

5 According to World Bank (2001: 27), “More than 30 percent of teachers in Malawi and Zambia are infected,” and that “HIV/AIDS forces millions of children out of school and into work.”

6 S. Devarajan, D. Dollar, and T. Holmgren (editors), Aid & Reform in Africa, World Bank, 2000

7 S. Ndegwa and H. Grandvoinnet, Decentralization in Africa: A Stocktaking Survey, 2002

8 See Aedo (1998), Creemers (1994), Hammond (1997), di Gropello (1999), Espinola (1997), Fuller and Rivarola (1998), Gershberg (1999), Guedes, et.al. (1995), Hanson (1997), Jimenez and Sawada (1998), King and Ozler (1998), Llad (1996), Paes de Barros and Pinto de Mendoca (1998), and Savedoff (1998).

9 Rondinelli (1981, 1986, & 1989) created the original basic vocabulary for describing the various ways in which governments may be expected to pursue administrative decentralization. 1) Deconcentration involves the central or federal government granting greater authority to its own sub-national authorities under its direct control. It is the weakest form of decentralization for it does not transfer any significant authority to sub-national governments. 2) Delegation involves creating semi-autonomous agencies, such as state-owned enterprises or public corporations. 3) Devolution entails the transfer of service delivery responsibility to independent sub-national levels of government, regions, provinces, municipalities, etc. 4) Privatization is often considered the most far-reaching form of decentralization. Early studies focused on fiscal decentralization; that is, the decentralization of functions related to public finance and public financial management. Fiscal decentralization can be further divided into two broad categories: 1) revenue-side fiscal decentralization, which involves granting sub-national levels of government greater control over tax and other revenue sources, and 2) expenditure-side fiscal decentralization, which involves greater expenditure responsibility on the part of sub-national governments. Revenue-side fiscal decentralization almost always includes expenditure-side fiscal decentralization; however, the latter may take place without the former, with the central government usually transferring financial resources to sub-national governments via grants or revenue sharing schemes. Increasingly, concerns have encompassed administrative decentralization and the transfer of a wide range of decision-making capacity, power sharing, as well as a true transfer of power.

10 For earlier African decentralization typologies, see Whitacre (1997) and AED (1996).

11 For example, in a review of implementation of education reform in Sub-Saharan Africa, Moulton (2001: 4) says “Funding agencies and governments used five sorts of instruments to implement reforms: inducements, capacity building, mandates, transfer of authority, and dialogue….The tool of transferring authority was not often used; it was not available to funding agencies and was unpopular with ministry officials.”

12 There is, of course, a continuum from public to private schools. Many private schools receive support from government and are included in the plans and strategies of education ministries; some forms of public schools, like community and informal schooling, arise locally in a governmental vacuum. Sometimes (increasingly so in Africa) education ministries are attempting to bring such schools more formally into the public sector.

13 OECD, Education at a Glance, various annual issues.

14 Here we discuss the rationale, as opposed to the political reason, for decentralization. Politically, decentralization may be pursued as a strategy to shift expenditure obligations to lower levels of government, to resolve ethnic conflicts by giving different language groups or tribes greater autonomy, etc.

15 See Ndegwa and Grandvoinnet for the definition and construction of the overall decentralization index.

16 Moulton (2001: 50)

17 As cited in AED (1996).

18 Workineh et all, (1999).

19 AED (1996: 22).

20 Girishankar et al (2001).

21 Hinchcliffe (2002)

22 This dynamic appears to be true even though SPEB chairmen and permanent members are appointed by state governors.

23 Additional uncertainty is brought into the budget process since the Federal transfers are highly dependent upon world oil prices from year to year.

24 Note that the obligation to provide teachers’ paychecks has changed several times between Federal, state, and local entities and one result has been inconsistent receipt of teacher pay leading to strikes.

25 With all these budget figures it is important to note that complete expenditure figures have not been estimated since 1962. Through a case study of ten states, Hincheliffe (2002) provides most of the rough estimates we present.

26 For the most part, however, LGEA monitoring of schools is limited to physical inspections, not student performance, although some do help identify effective teachers to receive additional training.

27 Government of Nigeria (2001).

28 See for example Gershberg (1999?)

29 Taylor (2001)

30 Momoniat (n.d.)

31 Minister of Education (2002)

32 Minister of Education (2002)

33 The government provides only 30 percent of funds for secondary schooling and enrolment rates are low.

34 See Ablo and Reinikka (1998) and Reinikka (2000)

35 World Bank (n.d.)

36 Azfar et al (2000).

37 “In Uganda, decentralization had various positive developments: increased participation, increased transparency and accountability, improvements in capacity building, etc. Nevertheless, the central government transfers still are insufficient, and the local governments are neither involved, nor even consulted on the national budget” De Muro (date)

38 Azfar et al (2000) interviewed and/or surveyed 137 sub-county education officials, 18 district education officials, 145 school principals, over a thousand households as well as key national officials.

39 The MoEC still is responsible for the provision of secondary schooling.

40 For example, see Miller-Grandvaux and Yoder (2000)

41 Government also limits access to public schools through the use of enrollment fees and dress requirements which may put the cost of public education beyond the reach of the poor, as shown in a recent study of Zambia [2001].

42 Watt (2001) lists nine Bank education projects 1995-2000 in Africa with direct community support: Cote d’Ivoire (1998); Madagascar (1998); Malawi (1995); Mali (2000); Mauritania (1995); Nigeria (2000); Rwanda (2000); Tanzania (1997); Zambia (2000). Four of these projects focused largely on construction and rehabilitation. It is safe to say the Bank has been less active in supporting community schools than US AID and other donors.

43 UNICEF (2001).

44 See Gershberg (1999).

45 For example, see Odonkor’s (2000) evaluation of CARE’s SCORE community school project in Ghana and Hyde et.al. (1997) evaluation of community schools run by Save the Children in Malawi.

46 Odonkor reports that community member have become more vocal and even begun making complaints at District Education Offices in Ghana.