DEVELOPING A SUSTAINABLE APPROACH TO SERVICE

DELIVERY IN ZAMBIAN LOCAL AUTHORITIES

Making Public Service Delivery in Councils in Zambia Sustainable

Can Public Service Delivery in Zambia be sustained through a
Business Approach?

The Case of Zambia

A MASTER OF BUSINESS THESIS

BY

GILBERT SENDAMA

2019

@2019
ABSTRACT
The provision of municipal public services has been at the centre of
humanity since the beginning of times. Registration of births is one
such public service reported as early as the biblical times and so are
the sanitation rules and need for a clean environment. These services
have evolved over time and come to integrate the aspect of human
rights, with communities demanding for these and other similar
services from people that hold political office.
Any local governance structure encompasses a systems approach
that comprise byelaws that are enforceable to enhance law and
order and government regulations through the application of
statutes from the principle laws of the land.
The constitution of Zambia is the supreme law of the land in which
human rights are enshrined for the equitable distribution of wealth
to all Zambians.
The local Government Act Chapter 281 of the laws of Zambia
provides for the establishment of city, municipal and town councils
in the country.
Moreover, 60 questionnaires embedded with closed and open
questions on developing a Sustainable Approach to Service Delivery
in Zambian Local Authorities were distributed among Itezhi – Tezhi
and Luangwa local authorities including councillors. 20
questionnaires were answered by employees from Itezhi – Tezhi
council in central province. Another batch of 20 questionnaires was
distributed among Luangwa council employees in Lusaka province.
The remaining 20 questionnaires were answered by councillors from
respective councils.
Null hypotheses incorporated the following questions; ‘How can
citizens share responsibility for the level of service provided by
individual local authorities’?, ‘How can central government

i
contribute to local government service delivery’?, ‘What are some of
the drawbacks and advantages of the current local government
financing system’?, ‘How can local authorities operate as business
entities and still maintain their position as non-profit making
organizations without creating a serious conflict of interest with the
local business fraternity’?, ‘Is Decentralization the key to improved
service delivery in local authorities in Zambia’ and ‘How can councils
help in boosting the capacity and levels of wealth and worth of its
local citizens to ensure their effective contribution to local
development and ultimately service delivery?
According to survey; Zambian local authorities needed to develop a
sustainable approach to Service Delivery through citizen
participation, consistent funding and material support from central
government, elimination of lacunas in the local authorities’ financial
systems, issue municipality bonds so to allow Public Service Delivery
in Zambia be sustained through a modern Business Approach of
project finance, embrace decentralisation policy and make local
authorities to attractive to investors so that capacity is boosted.

ii
Acknowledgements

iii
LETTER OF AUTHENTICITY

iv
LIST OF ACRONYMS

LG – Local authority
SPSS – statistical package for social sciences
IMF – international monetary fund
UN – United Nations
RTSA – Road Transport and safety agency
WB – World Bank
LED – Local economic development
GFA – Government Fiscal architecture
EU – European Union
CLS – Contrats Locaux De Securite
LAA – Local area agreement
LSP – Local strategic partnership
CRS – Corporate Social Responsibility
ISO – International Standardisation Organisation
UNESCAP – United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia
and Pacific
UNDP – United Nations Development Programmes
ALGA – Association of Local Governance auditors
OECD – Organisation for economic corporation development

v
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT...............................................................................................................................................i
Acknowledgements..............................................................................................................................iii
LETTER OF AUTHENTICITY.....................................................................................................................iv
LIST OF ACRONYMS...............................................................................................................................v
LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................................ix
CHAPTER ONE........................................................................................................................................1
1.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY.....................................................................................................1
1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT................................................................................................................2
1.4 RESEARCH PURPOSE....................................................................................................................2
1.5 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY...........................................................................................................3
1.6 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY............................................................................................................3
1.7 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS/RESEARCH QUESTIONS/PROPOSITIONS................................................3
1.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY.............................................................................................................4
CHAPTER TWO.......................................................................................................................................6
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW........................................................................................................................6
2.1 OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE..........................................................................................................6
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW (underpinning study) focus on research questions....................................8
2.2.1 How can citizens share responsibility for the level of service provided by individual local
authorities?...................................................................................................................................8
2.2.2 How can central government contribute to local government service delivery?...............12
2.2.3 What are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the current local government
financing system?........................................................................................................................22
2.2.4 How can local authorities operate as business entities and still maintain their position as
non-profit making organizations without creating a serious conflict of interest with the local
business fraternity?.....................................................................................................................28
2.2.5 Is Decentralization the key to improved service delivery in local authorities in Zambia?...43
2.2.6 How can councils help in boosting the capacity and levels of wealth and worth of its local
citizens to ensure their effective contribution to local development and ultimately service
delivery?......................................................................................................................................50
2.3 RESEARCH VARIABLES ARISING FROM LITERATURE...................................................................52
CHAPTER THREE..................................................................................................................................54
3.0 METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN........................................................................................................54

vi
 3.1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................54
3.2 RESEARCH APPROACH...............................................................................................................54
3.3 RESEARCH STRATEGY.................................................................................................................55
3.4 SAMPLING FRAME.....................................................................................................................55
3.5 SAMPLE SIZE, SAMPLING TECHNIQUE.......................................................................................56
3.6 OPERATIONALIZATION OF RESEARCH VARIABLES.....................................................................56
3.7 DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES...............................................................................................58
3.8 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS........................................................................................................58
CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................................................60
4.0 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS....................................................................................................60
4.1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................................60
4.2 PRESENTATION OF QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS.....................................................61
CHAPTER FIVE......................................................................................................................................79
5.0 ANALYSIS OF DATA........................................................................................................................79
5.1 ANALYSIS OF OVERALL FINDINGS..............................................................................................79
CHAPTER SIX........................................................................................................................................86
1.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................86
6.1 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION....................................................................................86
APPENDICES.........................................................................................................................................89
Appendix A – References.................................................................................................................89
Appendix B – Questionnaire............................................................................................................90
Appendix C – Research Proposal.....................................................................................................94

vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1, dynamic framework of citizen participation and its outcomes.............................................12
Figure 2, the tree legs of sustainable actors........................................................................................29
Figure 3, characteristics of good governance (source UNDP)..............................................................34
Figure 4, partnership that help business to contribute to sustainable development..........................36
Figure 5, macro policy frame work for sustainable businesses............................................................39
Figure 6, Conceptual frame work of the study....................................................................................53
Figure 7, validation of concept............................................................................................................54
Figure 8, data collection process.........................................................................................................56
Figure 9, distribution by gender..........................................................................................................61
Figure 10, age group............................................................................................................................63
Figure 11, qualification........................................................................................................................64
Figure 12, department.........................................................................................................................66
Figure 13, Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by individual local
authorities...........................................................................................................................................67
Figure 14, Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided by local
authority?............................................................................................................................................69
Figure 15, after how long does local authority sensitize citizens about what they are
supposed to do over services offered?..........................................................................................70
Figure 16, does central government contribute to local government service delivery...............71
Figure 17, are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system?................72
Figure 18, are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic and social
growth of the local authority?..........................................................................................................74
Figure 19, has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects undertaken
so that to reduce on citizen’s financial burden?............................................................................75
Figure 20, Is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local authorities in
Zambia...............................................................................................................................................76
Figure 21, the Chi – Square..................................................................................................................78

viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1, distribution by gender.........................................................................................................61
Table 2, statistics by age group............................................................................................................62
Table 3, statistics by highest qualification...........................................................................................63
Table 4, distribution by department....................................................................................................65
Table 5, Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by individual local
authorities...........................................................................................................................................66
Table 6, Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided by local
authority?............................................................................................................................................68
Table 7, after how long does local authority sensitize citizens about what they are supposed
to do over services offered?............................................................................................................69
Table 8, does central government contribute to local government service delivery..................71
Table 9, are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system?...................72
Table 10, Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic and social
growth of the local authority?..........................................................................................................73
Table 11, has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects undertaken
so that to reduce on citizen’s financial burden?............................................................................74
Table 12, is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local authorities in
Zambia?.............................................................................................................................................76
Table 13, the chi – Square...................................................................................................................77

ix
CHAPTER ONE

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The study was conducted to develop a sustainable approach to

service delivery in Zambian local authorities. This chapter discusses
the background of the study, problem statement, research purpose,
and rationale of the study, objective of the study, research
hypothesis/research questions/propositions and significance of the
study.

1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Much research on issues of good governance approaches to the most

appropriate ways to deliver service to the public have been
undertaken with little or not much progress towards the
implementation of a decentralised system that delivers to the
people.
Decentralization is indeed an effort at trying to devolve power to the
grassroots. However conflicts about between central and local
government, with each tier of government trying to claim service
directly to the communities.
Paul Smyth et al in his book, Community and Local Governance in
Australia brought this point to light:
“The dominance of central priorities over local ones is further
associated with the tensions in the modernisation agenda between
managerialism on the one hand and participation and democracy on
the other. In one sense, the prominence of references to
participation in the modernisation and governance discourse reflects
a strategy by the centre to bypass entrenched opposition from local
councillors and officials by appealing over their heads to ‘the
people’.” Paul Smyth et al (2005-pp25)

1
1.3 PROBLEM STATEMENT

Experience has shown and it is a matter of fact that citizens in every

community continue to demand for the equitable distribution of
wealth through the delivery of quality public services from
government through their locally elected civic leaders. Local
authorities are therefore the centre of the delivery of these
lifesaving commodities. These are goods of a public nature that local
governments are expected to provide at little or no cost all to ensure
a safe and healthy environment for both human life and business
development.
It is also a well-known fact that Councils or local authorities have
failed to fully provide these services which demand for huge
investment in both infrastructure and human capital to effectively
and efficiently deliver.
A local authority is only as wealthy as its citizens who are expected to
contribute to the development and maintenance of the fabric of the
town, municipality or city as the case might be through the payment
of levies charges and fees as provided for in the local byelaws,
statutes in line with council approved budgets.
However, most local authorities fall short of providing the minimum
basic services.
In this paper the author will attempt to establish some of the reasons
why councils fail to meet the needs of their local citizens.

1.4 RESEARCH PURPOSE

The purpose of the research is fourfold:

 To measure the capacity of councils in local service
delivery

2
  To establish the minimum level of service expected
of councils by the citizens.
 To determine the role of central government in the
delivery of local services
 To research on mechanisms that would help
councils raise the requisite finances for the effective
delivery of public services

1.5 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

The rationale of the study is to find means by which councils can

evolve from dependence and operate on business models in line
with modern trends.

1.6 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the study is to establish ways by which councils can

engage in financially beneficial programmes in order to reduce the
burden of local taxes of its citizens, deliver efficiently through a
business approach while remaining public non-profit making
organizations

1.7 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS/RESEARCH QUESTIONS/PROPOSITIONS

The following questions will help to establish means by which both

research and existing facts can lead to beneficial conclusions on the
current state of affairs.
1. How can citizens share responsibility for the level of service
provided by individual local authorities
2. How can central government contribute to local government
service delivery
3. What are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the
current local government financing system
4. How can local authorities operate as business entities and still
maintain their position as non-profit making organizations
3
 without creating a serious conflict of interest with the local
business fraternity
5. Is Decentralization the key to improved service delivery in local
authorities in Zambia
6. How can councils help in boosting the capacity and levels of
wealth and worth of its local citizens to ensure their effective
contribution to local development and ultimately service
delivery?

1.8 SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY

It is a well-known fact that every government has an obligation to

protect its nationals from exploitation by scrupulous business
entities. This is achieved by ensuring that necessary restrictions are
put in place through consumer protection agencies and the provision
of subsidies on water, food, energy health, education and other
related services. This happens whether economies are operated as
liberal or a completely nationalized or indeed a mixed economy.
Usually liberal economies operate more efficiently than nationalized
economies due to the fact that market forces determine the growth
as opposed to insecurity associated with nationalized economies that
tend to increase the risk on investment arising from political
instability.
The significance of the study is that it will help to gather information
and test the hypothesis that Councils can operate as business entities
for the very protection of the local citizenry for the sole purpose of
bridging two gaps, namely:
 Local financing of service delivery
 Effective and efficient service delivery
Quite clearly it is evident from research that financial and other
material resources mobilized at local level using local capacities

4
provides the basis for a sustainable approach to service delivery, Paul
Smyth argues that:

“Local initiative is also necessary, it is argued, because economic

success depends partly on the mobilisation of local capacities in the
light of local circumstances. Thus far, however, there seem to be few
signs that this more optimistic agenda, attractive as it may be locally,
is having much purchase centrally.” Paul Smyth et al (2005-pp26)
In contrast most countries in Africa and Zambia alike have
established central government agencies to operate a number of
functions prescribed for local authorities citing lack of capacity at
local council level (broadened)
In this study therefore, it was imperative that a business case was
made to prove whether or not, councils are capable of operating a
social but somewhat business oriented approach to service delivery
as opposed to centralizing critical services at national level through
comparative studies (reframed)
The question is how can this be done and succeed. What does the
Zambian history show as indicators as to how councils managed
sustainable business ventures in the past?
What are some of the dynamics that have led to the failure of local
authorities to manage successful business ventures?

5
CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

A number of authorities or gurus ,scholars on local government

,seasoned local government practitioners ,researchers ,regional and
international bodies have taken time to compile information and
facts on the subject of local government and its many facets as it
affects human/animal life ,the natural and business environment,
governance ,justice, local and national economies. Civil society
worldwide demand for the fair distribution of services and have
therefore been an all-weather ally through advocacy and
partnerships in helping to fulfil the aspirations of the citizens
especially in the lower and middle income strata of society.

It is also a well-known fact that civil society will only succeed at

compelling both central governments and local authorities to deliver
based on the level of financial independence of individual councils
resulting from industrial development at local level aimed at wealth
and employment creation.

Paul smyth et all quoting Stillwell et al, and Nieuwenhuysen et al on

page 58 reports that:

“First, there is increasing recognition of the interdependence of

policies and in particular the need for policy settings that are
6
sustainable – economically, socially and environmentally. The
economic policy settings implemented in most industrialised
societies over the last twenty years have been associated with
significant increases in productivity and economic growth (as
measured by GDP). They have also been linked to significant
increases in inequality, with a growing gap between rich and poor,
included and excluded, secure and insecure.” (Stillwell 2000;
Nieuwenhuysen, Lloyd & Mead 2001).
Arising from the above and taking into account its wider scope, the
author in this study sampled the invaluable works of some of the
authorities in the latter as a basis for authentic review in order to
justify the need for this research paper.
The scope of this thesis is therefore limited to the cited research
questions only.
LOCAL AUTHORITY
A local authority, sometimes also referred to as a municipal
authority, is a term that refers to a rural and urban political
subdivision below the national level which is constituted by law and
has substantial control of local affairs, and which includes authorities
in counties, municipalities, cities, villages and others. The term
excludes district or regional subdivisions of the national government
that are set up solely for national administrative purposes (United
Nations, 1997: vi).
Local authorities are created to render services in defined
geographical areas, primarily because of the inability of central
government to attend in detail to all the requirements of society that
have to be satisfied by a government institution. The range of urban
services provided by local authorities in developing countries, more
particularly in Africa, are, inter alia, parks, street, sanitation, refuse
collection, road construction and maintenance, housing, water and
sewerage, primary education, clinics, residential and industrial
7
estates, planning and zoning, fire and ambulance services, camping
sites and recreational services (Meyer, 1978: 12).
A local authority is thus a public institution functioning under the
direction and control of an elected council but subject to the
directives of the national and provincial legislative and political
executive institutions. A local authority is a corporate body which is a
legal person and exists separately from and independently of the
persons who head it. Local authorities are created to give residents
of their area a say in the government and administration of local
affairs and are vested with specific powers to enable them to make
by-laws, which are not inconsistent with the legislation passed by
Parliament and provincial legislatures. Local authorities are usually
headed by councils consisting of elected members. In other words
local authorities are intended to be democratic institutions which are
responsive to real needs and the justifiable expectations of people.
They are thus subject to public accountability and therefore, it is
important to focus on local government democracy.

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW (underpinning study) focus on research questions

2.2.1 How can citizens share responsibility for the level of service provided by
individual local authorities?
Citizens can share responsibility through participation in local
governance.
A number of scholars have suggested that citizen participation plays
an important role in the process of development management.
Moynihan (2003: 174) believes that participation leads to improved
public efficiency by achieving both allocative efficiency “through
better resource allocation choices” and managerial efficiency
through “improvement of the process of public service provisions.”
Participation also leads to effective policy implementation.
Many scholars have alluded to various aspects that support the
above point of view:

8
In particular, citizen participation helps better identify and
understand citizens’ needs (Roberts, 2008), improves local planning
and budgeting (Lu & Xue, 2011), enhances rational decision-making
(Box, 1998; Neshkova & Guo, 2011; UN, 2008), eases the
implementation of decisions (Gerston, 2002; Yang & Pandey, 2011),
produces equity-based decision-making and inclusive development
(Adams, Bell & Brown, 2002; Mohanty, 2010; Venugopal & Yilmaz,
2009), and helps to deliver bet-ter services (UN, 2008; UNDP, 1993).
It also produces “outcomes that favor the poor and disadvantaged”
(UN, 2008, p. 23). Specifically, Handley and Howell-Moroney (2010)
found that a higher degree of participation had a larger impact on
the improve-ment in local planning and budgeting. Kweit and Kweit
(1981) claimed that a number of problems related to planning could
be resolved when diverse people were involved in the planning
process, because different people bring different perspectives,
knowledge, and information.
According to Batley & Rose (2011), participation contributes to
inclusive, equitable, and participatory planning and budgeting, and
improved service delivery (especially to the economically
disadvantaged). Citizen participation, then, appears to be an
important strategy for strengthening local planning systems.
Citizen participation and local government accountability
A number of studies have suggested that citizen participation
improves the accountability of LGs. For example, citizen participation
reinforces traditional accountability systems and expands the scope
of accountability (Blair, 2000; Devas & Grant, 2003; Gaventa &
Barrett, 2012). The participation of citizens is also instrumental in the
design of needs-based policies (Rocha-Menocal & Sharma, 2008) and
it makes LGs more transparent (Kaufmann & Bellver, 2005), increases
levels of trust felt by citizens (Irvin & Stansbury, 2004; Wang & Wart,
2007), and bolsters the legitimacy of government decisions and
actions (Farazmand, 2009; UN, 2008). In fact, participation is an
9
important mechanism that can control the actions of government
officials, and it can therefore strengthen local accountability systems
(see also Blair, 2000; UN, 2008).
However, it may be misleading to assume that participation always
leads to the desired results. They have their own trajectories, and
such trajectories depend on the institutional and contextual
specificities of the participatory events (Fung & Wright, 2003;
Osmani, 2007). Some studies have found that participation can
produce negative outcomes (Gaventa & Barrett, 2012; Rocha
Menocal & Sharma, 2008). For instance, Gaventa and Barrett (2012:
5) found that participation may lead “to a sense of disempowerment
and a reduced sense of agency, or to new knowledge hierarchies.” It
may also be “meaningless, tokenistic, or manipulated. … [or] can
contribute to new skills and alliances which are used for corrupt and
non-political ends, or are captured by elites." Irvin and Stansbury’s
(2004) review concluded that participation may involve more time,
lead to higher costs, and increase the chances of inappropriate
decisions. It may also lead to elite capture and engender the pursuit
of personal gains by empowered individuals. Furthermore,
participation may even decrease the representativeness of citizens
and reduce their pow-er in public decision-making.
To analyse these outcomes, Osmani (2007) has developed a three-
gap model, comprising a capacity gap, an incentive gap, and a power
gap. These gaps were used to examine factors associated with the
negative outcomes of participation. The capacity gap can arise from
a lack of certain skills, knowledge, and various resources between
the participating citizens and the government, hindering the ability of
LGs to fully convert citizen inputs into policy outputs (Farazmand,
2009; Osmani, 2007). A lack of capacity, ex-pressed, for example, in
terms of insufficient human and financial resources, can be a critical
impediment to successful LG reform and effective citizen
participation (Esonu & Kavanamur, 2011). The concept of an

10
incentive gap stems from the fact that participation is not costless
(Osmani, 2007; UN, 2008). An incentive gap can be described as a
short fall in potential gains desired compared to the various costs
that participation entails in terms of finances, time, and opportunity
(UN, 2008). A power gap may arise from the systemic asymmetry of
power relations that is inherent in unequal societies (Osmani, 2007;
Rocha-Menocal & Sharma, 2008).
The literature reviewed above helps us to develop a framework that
explains how the different characteristics of local governments (LGs)
and citizens affect participation outcomes. In Figure 1, the shaded
box indicates that participation outcomes are highly dependent on
the process of participation. For example, outcomes are particularly
dependent on the capacity of citizens to assert their rights and to
influence the decisions of LGs. Out-comes also depend on the
structure of LGs, which affects LGs’ capacity to respond and
incorporate participation input into LG decisions.
“revenues also influence the degree to which public services are
responsive to immediate needs; that is, service delivery is not
responsive if those who need the service cannot pay for it, or if the
revenue system places too great a burden on the recipient. The
proliferation of user fees, as local governments become increasingly
dependent on own-source revenues, carries with it a host of equity
issues and also threatens service-level adequacy.” pp11(Gerasimos
A. Gianakis et al)
In turn, these processes are affected by the institutional,
administrative, and policy characteristics of LGs, as well as the level
of competence and representativeness of the participating citizens.
All of these factors are influenced by the participation environment.
In this study, instead of separate discussion, participation processes
and outcomes are discussed in a combined way in order to better
explain how the process affects the outcomes.

11
Figure 1, dynamic framework of citizen participation and its outcomes

2.2.2 How can central government contribute to local government service delivery?
The authors of 50 Years of local Government in Zambia, a book
compiled by local government practitioners from various disciplines,
prior to the celebration of Zambia’s Jubilee of independence
emphasized regarding disparities in financing of local authorities and
gaps created by centralized systems that: “the fiscal decentralisation
tenet of ‘finance follows function’, should be that any policy measure
announced taken or implemented by central government must be
accompanied by revenue measures to support it.’’ (p106) italics ours.
In the case of Zambia, most of the functions are outlined in chapter
281 of the local Government act of parliament, and further
underpinned in the constitution of the Republic of Zambia in recent
years. These functions most of which entail the collection of
revenues that drive the economy of Zambia are placed under legally
constituted technical agencies. Some of the agencies include Road
Traffic Safety Agency (RTSA), National Road Fund Agency and Road
Development Agency. Cooperating partners such as World Bank,
International Monetary Fund (IMF) have rendered invaluable
technical and financial support in such capacity building programmes
in order to increase efficiency in the delivery of roads and related

12
infrastructure. However this has only resulted in the accomplishment
of more trunk road network infrastructure programmes as opposed
to district roads in the country. Some scholars have insisted on the
opposite:
“It makes sound economic, social and environmental sense to
develop ways of working, ways of doing business and ways of making
policy which start by valuing and understanding the complex
relationships between environmental, social and economic logics,
values and forces.” Paul Smyth et al (2005-pp59)
A case in point is the recent road tolling infrastructure development
programme in Zambia. The initiative which was long overdue helped
the national government to create a more focused self-financing
system for new infrastructure and sustainable regular maintenance
planning.
However, revenues so collected and yet outlined in the new
constitution as funds due to the local authorities are not equitably
disbursed to the local communities (councils) to support Local
Economic Development (LED) programmes.
In this paper the author will aver to decipher facts from authorities
on the subject and deduce ways in which government can either
speed up the process of decentralizing responsibility or indeed
creating a conducive environment for finance to follow function.
In recent years, government put in place a programme of action
meant to devolve functions to the local authorities BUT without
matching resources to the local councils meant to cut bureaucracy in
the funding mechanisms for devolved ministry functions. Ministry
headquarters and staff appointing commissions are currently going
through the modalities for the transfer of staff and finances through
the Inter- Governmental Fiscal Architecture (IGFA).

13
This process has stalled due to the human factor whereby individuals
have put their personal rather than national interest first for fear
that local authorities will wield more power on matters of national
interest. A case in point is one of the recommendations made at the
National Dialogue Forum to disenfranchise mayors and council
chairpersons by insisting the reduction of their electoral from the
district to being voted into office only by their fellow elected officials.
It can be argued that the action taken by Zambian legislators does
not empower the grassroots and therefore cannot help to
strengthen the central government in its pursuit to deliver
development to the whole nation. The partnership between central
and local government cannot be overemphasized.
“some of the rhetoric of partnership, such as the importance of
partners treating each other as equals as far as possible (rooted in a
rather naive pluralism), and focuses unduly on individual behaviours
rather than the structural contexts and constraints of partnerships.”
Paul Smyth et al (2005-pp26)
Good Practices in the Relationship between Central (State/Region)
and Local Authorities – The Case of Developed Countries
The study of the main areas of responsibility shows that, in any single
responsibility, concurrent functions correspond to different
authorities, making necessary interactions between them. Some of
those relations, due to their nature or intensity, might provide for a
better understanding of the counterparts and facilitate a more
effective implementation of policies to the benefit of citizens.
Frequent contacts between local authorities and central civil
servants, when the nature of the issues requires information,
consultation or advice is the interaction member states most
commonly point out, both when analysing any single responsibility or
when giving a more general answer about good practices on their
mutual relationship.

14
A) Bilateral consultation structures and mechanisms
Almost all the member states consider consultation the most
frequent form of interaction. Mandatory consultation in local issues
– legal reforms, budget definition, local taxes – with Local Authority
Associations is established incases. Interlocution is usually carried
out by Municipalities Associations and central political officials. In
many member states, there are formal structures of consultation
(conferences, working groups, etc.) that meet periodically (yearly,
quarterly, etc.).
B) Information and advice to local authorities
Central authorities can also play an important role in advising local
authorities. Usually information relationships are more informal and
tend to have as interlocutors civil servants and individual
municipalities rather than institutionalised contacts at political level.
Decentralised State or regional bodies are often in charge of this type
of interlocution, as proximity is very important for the success of this
task. In some cases, guidance or information is accompanied by
training of local staff, in an attempt to help municipalities improve
their performance. This type of contact occurs wherever necessary,
usually without any predetermined frequency because of its informal
nature. Electronic communications facilitate the increase of contacts,
their frequency and the speed of response.
Several initiatives in member states show new ways to reach local
authorities and help them understand issues of local interest.
Hungary reports the existence of several services maintained by
central authorities – the Ministry of local government and territorial
development – that advise or train local governments and officials. A
“Hot Line for Local Governments” is run by ministerial services giving
instant and professional help by telephone to local authorities. In
addition, regular conferences are held, in the presence of

15
international experts that provide professional training both for local
political representatives and civil servants.
A European Union Information Service for Local Governments was
set up in 2003 to help local governments in the process of
integration, providing information on EU matters, support on legal
harmonisation issues and information on tender opportunities. The
Ministry also publishes documents, guidelines and books of
relevance to local governments. The Italian Ministry of the Interior
carries out a permanent service of information and advice in favour
of local authorities both directly (by means of the so-called “Window
for local authorities”) and by means of its deconcentrated offices at
provincial level (“Prefecture-U.T.G.”, i.e. territorial government’s
office). In the context of this activity, the Ministry gathers and
publishes on its official website the Municipalities’ bylaws. Moreover
Italy’s regional governments have administrative offices that monitor
the work of local authorities, provide legal counselling, information
and guidance.
The annual Day of Dialogue in Bulgaria is a nation-wide initiative that
brings together (in each of the 28 districts) the constituency’s
members of parliament, mayors, other municipal representatives
and citizens, as well as members of central government
deconcentrated structures and the media. The main outcome of
these meetings is a better understanding of the respective
stakeholders’ positions.
In Spain, expert courses organised by regional police academies for
local police forces are considered to be a good tool for co-ordinating
the action and procedures in security matters.
In Switzerland, local representatives are often members of cantonal
parliaments. Being part of both governmental tiers facilitates a
number of informal contacts and information exchanges thought to
be beneficial to local authorities.

16
Ukraine reports information flows from local authorities towards
central authorities in the form of written progress reports or
submission of indicators (financial, social, etc.) to evaluate local
needs. Some other States also mention central guidance, information
and support to local authorities. The geographical proximity –
according to the size of a country – to local authorities favours
interactions, whenever an issue or dossier needs it. Institutionalised
or general support is more frequent in bigger States, Luxembourg
and Switzerland, for instance, indicate that smooth relations are
favoured by the proximity and the territorially limited dimension of
each governmental tier.
C) Co-operation mechanisms
Co-operation concerning the definition of objectives, management or
financial support are also considered good practice by local
authorities and central bodies.
In Bulgaria, an agreement was signed on 12 October 2005 between
the Council of Ministers and the Association of Municipalities
establishing institutionalised co-operation. The agreement provides
for lasting co-operation based upon the principles of partnership,
transparency and concerted action. It also ensures the provision of
effective public services and contributed to the preparation of the
municipalities for the accession of Bulgaria to the EU. These co-
operation mechanisms involve central authorities and the National
Association of Municipalities and include regular meetings or
participation in advisory, monitoring and working groups. In addition,
inter-municipal cooperation for regional policy issues can lead to the
setting up of Partnership Boards (local authorities, private
entrepreneurs, citizen associations, etc.) for the implementation of
measures, programmes and projects of mutual interest.
France has developed co-operation structures between State and
territorial authorities (where local authorities intervene). Firstly,

17
Contrats de Villes (CDV) between State and territorial authorities try
to prevent social exclusion. The CDV targets action in city quarters
with risk of social exclusion due to unemployment, housing or
violence problems. Secondly, Contrats locaux de sécurité (CLS) are
concluded between those authorities that can work together in
order to improve security conditions.
In Iceland, a Collaborative Agreement setting the framework for
relations between State and local authorities was concluded in
February 2006. Its main aim is to establish a formal structure for
relations between the State and municipalities and to harmonise
public management policies. Under the Agreement, expert
committees from both tiers periodically meet to discuss common
matters.
In Italy, providing for co-operation is a regional function. There is a
political figure in each Region in charge of co-operation and an
administrative support structure. In the main policy areas there are
usually bodies to provide for cooperation. Furthermore a specific co-
operation mechanism, recently set up in Italy, is very similar to the
above-mentioned French CLS. More precisely, in order to carry out
extraordinary programmes to enhance law enforcement and security
services, the Minister of the Interior and, by proxy, the prefects
(prefetti) may sign agreements with the regional government and the
local authorities, providing for the logistic, instrumental and financial
contribution of the region and the local authorities.
The district commissaries in Luxembourg exercise advisory,
mediation and coordination functions between central and local
authorities. In the Slovak Republic, joint municipal offices are created
in order to ensure the exercise of responsibilities by an association of
municipalities when it is not possible for each municipality on its
own. It is considered a good coordination mechanism by central
authorities to provide services with higher standards.

18
In Switzerland, shared responsibilities between cantons and
municipalities are conditioned to co-operation duties in order to
ensure an effective exercise of those responsibilities. Public Law
societies charged with federal duties frequently have representatives
of both cantons and municipalities on their administration board.
In the United Kingdom, a “Framework for Partnership” governing
relations between central and local government exists (in England
since 1997, in Scotland since 2001), although it has no statutory
basis. In England, the “Central Local Partnership” meets regularly to
consider major issues affecting local government.
In Scotland, the objective of the Framework is said to be to ensure
regular liaison and discussion. Procedures for consultation and joint
work have been established.
In England, there are also mechanisms for mutually defining
priorities between central and local authorities. A Local Area
Agreement (LAA) is a three-year agreement that pools central
government funding around priorities for a local area in certain
policy fields as agreed with central government. The local area is
represented by the local authority and Local Strategic Partnership
(LSP), a single body that brings together different parts of the public
sector, as well as the private, business, community and voluntary
sectors at a local level, so that initiatives and services support each
other and work together.
D) Financial good practices
Good practices in the financial domain concern bilateral definition of
the incomes needed by local authorities to assume their
responsibilities and to be capable of delivering services to
citizens.The Bulgarian budget approval process provides for
participation of the National Association of Municipalities at different
stages. Consultation, both at a political and expert level, tries to
assure a transparent and balanced allocation of funds. If opinions
19
diverge, a bilateral protocol is appended to the draft budget enabling
the Council of Ministers to decide on the issue.
Denmark’s municipalities have been playing an important role in the
formulation of economic policies for 20 years. Budget co-operation is
based on a general agreement that, after the establishment of
economic and political goals by central authorities (government and
Parliament), these economic policies are developed through
voluntary agreements with local authorities.
These agreements define the rate of growth in public spending, the
rates of municipal taxes and other issues related to local expenditure
and income. The agreements are concluded between central
government and local authorities’ associations. They are not binding
for each municipality, although it is assumed that the members of
the association will honour the agreements.
Estonia’s central and local authorities have reached an agreement
concerning the way negotiations on budgetary issues must be
conducted.
In Finland, co-operation between central and local authorities is
carried out to discuss the allocation of municipal resources. There is
a cost impact assessment for acts of Parliament in respect of their
likely impact on local authorities (municipalities).
In Iceland, there is an agreement on the cost evaluation of law
proposals and regulations for municipalities’ finances. In August
2004, a pilot project originally started in 2002 was extended for two
years in order to evaluate the overall effect on municipal finances of
central government draft bills and regulations. Several ministries –
Ministry of Social Affairs, Ministry of Education, Science and Culture,
Ministry of Environmental Affairs – participate in the assessment,
along with the Association of Icelandic Local Authorities.

20
In Italy, an important role is played by the so-called Unified
Conference (Central Government, Regions and Authorities) which
expresses an opinion in particular, on the budget bill.
In Luxembourg, a Superior Council of Local Finance fosters dialogue
between local and central authorities related to municipalities
finances.
Malta’s Joint Financial Committee is a formal structure that provides
for dialogue between central and local authorities on local authority
income.
The Netherlands have “ex-ante” supervision procedures in order to
grant balanced budgets. Norway also reports the existence of a
system of distribution of local incomes. Joint financing is considered
by Portugal as a successful way to set up projects that contribute to
improve the living conditions of local citizens. Switzerland’s financial
equalisation system is thought to be quite effective for avoiding
great disparities between municipalities and allowing them to
assume their legal responsibilities. These cantonal systems require
regular contacts between municipalities and cantonal authorities. In
Bern, a common body wasset up to discuss these matters.
Ukraine’s Ministry of Finance audits local budgets and can submit
proposals to the Cabinet of Ministers in order to improve the
interaction between the state budget and local budgets.
E) Delegation of responsibilities
In some cases, an extension of local responsibilities through
delegation by the central government is reported as a good practice
of interaction.
In the Czech Republic, certain municipalities, under a “Joint model of
public administration”, have extended delegated powers. In such
cases, municipalities perform these delegated responsibilities for
other municipalities as well. Intense co-ordination mechanisms have

21
been established by means of formal structures of consultation and
regular meetings between the different governmental tiers.
Furthermore, Government Resolution nº 237 of 17 March 2004
approves a Project called “Better co-ordination of the central
administration towards the territorial public administration”.
In Spain, a second decentralisation process is demanded by
municipalities – Pacto Local – aiming at the delegation of
responsibilities from autonomous communities (regions) to local
authorities.

2.2.3 What are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the current local government
financing system?
The Structure and Requirements of Local Government Finance
Systems
If local governments are to realize their considerable potential in
public service and help to effectively deal with prevailing and
emerging challenges and crises, they must operate under a legal
framework, institutional structures, and procedures that meet
certain requirements. Some of these are explicitly fiscal in nature,
while others relate to the larger political and institutional context in
which local governments operate.
Core Elements of the Fiscal System according to Edward Elgar (2010);
Local governments are typically assigned a range of service delivery
and other key functions by constitutional or legal provisions. It is
generally accepted that these functions should be appropriate in
terms of their relevance for localities and their suitability for local
implementation. There is also general agreement that clarity of
functional assignment is important to ensure that local governments
and their constituents have a consistent understanding of local
responsibilities. Sufficient expenditure autonomy is considered
critical so local governments can respond to local needs.

22
Local governments also need access to funds to discharge their
functions and to meet evolving expectations of their constituents.
Central governments have a comparative advantage in revenue
generation, so a major portion of local resources is often derived
from shared taxes and intergovernmental transfers. Transfers can be
unconditional or conditional, and they may be used for recurrent and
capital spending. Transfers should be funded by a stable and
predictable pool of resources and allocated by appropriate criteria or
formulae. The balance between conditional and unconditional
transfers may vary in different contexts, but some unrestricted
resources allow local governments to exercise the autonomy that is
central to their own comparative advantage in service delivery.
Beyond transfers, local governments need to have dedicated sources
of revenue over which they must have a degree of discretionary
control. This allows for the creation of a tangible linkage between the
costs and benefits of local service delivery, and it also provides local
governments with a means to increase the amount of revenue they
can raise independently to finance the range and level of services
demanded from them. Local own-source revenues may take the
form of taxes on appropriate bases, or they may be non-tax
revenues, such as user fees and charges, and license and registration
fees, among others.
Finally, as intergovernmental fiscal systems mature, local
governments need to have adequate access to infrastructure
finance. Some development spending can be funded with transfers,
but eventually local governments, particularly in urban areas, need
access to the capital market, whether directly or, in less advanced
systems, through intermediary institutions with some government
involvement. Local borrowing, however, needs to be governed by a
suitable framework and adequate fiscal responsibility safeguards.
Non-Fiscal System Requirements according to Edward Elgar (2010);

23
The focus of this report is on finance, but other aspects of
intergovernmental systems covered in GOLD I are critical to ensuring
effective local governments. As noted above, accountability is central
to attaining the potential benefits of decentralization. This is often
framed as the political dimension of decentralization, and the
mainstream "gold standard" for accountability is regular democratic
elections. Not all countries have or want free and competitive local
elections, however, and other mechanisms that allow for citizen
engagement with local governments—public access to information,
feedback, and complaint mechanisms, etc. — can improve
accountability. Moreover, local elections alone are a rather blunt
accountability instrument, and non-electoral mechanisms can play a
critical role in enhancing local accountability even where elections
are well established
Institutional dimensions of decentralization are also extremely
important. Local governments need appropriate organizational
structures, well-defined systems and procedures for managing public
resources, and suitable frameworks and mechanisms for engaging
with other levels of government, private sector firms and
nongovernmental actors. Moreover, local governments must possess
or be able to develop the capacity needed to properly operate within
the institutional framework. Although these political and institutional
aspects of local government systems were covered in GOLD I and are
not given primary attention in this report, their role in making fiscal
decentralization effective cannot be over-stated. Without adequate
accountability mechanisms, appropriate operational systems and
sufficient capacity, autonomous local fiscal powers can lead to
problematic rather than productive outcomes.
The Global Reality of Local Government Finance Systems according to
Edward Elgar (2010);
Some countries have long had robust local finance systems with
strong development of the components outlined above, and many
24
others have taken steps to develop systems in recent years. At the
same time, all countries —from the most advanced industrial to the
most fragile developing— face various challenges illustrated
throughout GOLD II. Some challenges are related to weak system
development and capacity constraints, particularly in developing
countries, or more generally to resource shortfalls. Other challenges
are external to the finance system but affect demands placed on it
and the way it functions.
System Challenges and Dilemmas according to Edward Elgar (2010);
Many elements of local finance systems outlined above do not exist,
are incomplete, or have been implemented inconsistently with the
underlying framework, particularly in developing countries. Fiscal
frameworks range from well to poorly designed (relative to
normative principles and contextual realities) in terms of revenue
and expenditure assignments, correspondence between revenues
and expenditures, transfers, subnational borrowing frameworks, etc.
More broadly, overall constitutional and legal frameworks for local
government (with respect to legal status, political mechanisms,
empowerment, administrative and staffing structures, etc.) range
from being well developed to barely having begun.
A common problem with fiscal systems is insufficient clarity in the
assignment of local government expenditure responsibilities. Even
where responsibilities are reasonably well defined in more advanced
systems, expenditure challenges may be created by unfunded
mandates from higher level governments and the lack of well-
developed methodologies and practices to translate expenditure
assignment responsibilities into quantifiable resource needs. Degrees
of autonomy in expenditure decisions also vary widely. An
overarching challenge with service provision in a multi-level
government system is which functions should be undertaken at each
level and how levels should interact, including the metropolitan
governance issues outlined above. These are tough decisions since
25
there is a common trade-off between fiscal viability at higher levels
and political connectivity at lower levels.
In struggling to achieve a balance, countries must consider the
benefits and pitfalls of amalgamation versus division, as well as the
potential value of creating mechanisms to bridge jurisdictional
fragmentation, such as the use of special districts and/or frameworks
for voluntary joint initiatives across local governments. Progress has
been made in developing tax sharing and intergovernmental
transfers, but problems persist. Transfers may be inadequately or
unreliably funded, and the criteria used to allocate resources may be
unclearly specified or inappropriate. Despite growing fiscal
disparities across localities in much of the world, few countries use
genuine equalization grants to increase parity in access to basic
services across communities, some of which have low revenue
capacity or high spending needs due to demographics or other
factors beyond their control. Where equalization grants exist, they
may be poorly funded or undermine incentives for local tax efforts or
expenditure efficiency. Many countries also struggle with the right
balance between unconditional grants, which promote autonomy,
and conditional grants, which ensure attention to national priorities.
Challenges to local revenue generation are particularly pervasive.
Although there is more agreement about the need for strong
expenditure autonomy than there is for revenue autonomy, some
discretion is seen as necessary to promote local accountability. Even
where taxes that are widely considered to be appropriate local
sources, such as the property tax, are allowed, they may not be well
used. The property tax is a difficult and expensive tax to administer
and tends to be especially unpopular among taxpayers. Even when it
is relatively well administered, its revenue potential may be limited,
and other productive revenue sources have often not been assigned
to local governments.

26
Only a few countries in more developed regions have robust systems
of local government development finance. Many countries
implement capital conditional grant programs and local governments
dedicate a large share of resources to financing investments, but the
longer-term response to the needs outlined above must include
enhancing responsible access to credit for local governments. Some
countries have successfully operated financial intermediaries for
local governments, but this approach has faced challenges and has
been undermined by political pressures in many cases.
These challenges to developing robust local finance systems, and in
some countries poor local government performance, have led to
instances of backtracking on decentralization. Since the publication
of GOLD I there has been an emerging recentralization trend in some
countries around the world. Disappointing performance in emerging
systems, however, may result from expecting too much too quickly
from nascent local governments and failing to adequately support
building their capacity to fulfill the roles expected of them.
External Challenges according to Edward Elgar (2010);
A number of major phenomena outlined earlier —natural resource
crises (environmental, energy, food security), urbanization,
infrastructure shortfalls, and the global financial crisis— were framed
as problems that local governments could contribute to alleviating.
At the same time, it is important to recognize that they also pose
considerable challenges to local governments. Dealing with them
effectively will require more resources, greater technical expertise,
and considerable ability to negotiate complex issues with a range of
interested parties with varying degrees of power.
Thus, the extent to which local governments could take action to
respond to these serious global threats to development depends on
the extent to which they are properly equipped and supported to do
so. In this regard, it is important to note that some central

27
governments seem not to understand their own critical role in
providing an environment conducive to local government action
intended to meet these challenges. On the contrary, the tendency
towards recentralization in some countries seems to have been
exacerbated by the response to the world financial and economic
crisis. Central governments in a number of African, Latin American,
and Eurasian countries have adopted policies of unilaterally
interrupting the disbursement of revenue sharing and other
transfers. In other cases, central governments have increased control
over funding allocations or mandates over how local governments
must spend resources.
2.2.4 How can local authorities operate as business entities and still maintain their
position as non-profit making organizations without creating a serious conflict of
interest with the local business fraternity?
Paul smyth quotes Steve Garlick (2002: 10):
The creative region is one where innovative people come together
and pool their ideas to generate non-linear solutions to issues that
contribute to their local communities becoming better places. The
creative region will be one that has the ability to generate and
implement new ideas, by actively linking its structures and processes
of innovation and learning to regional needs.pp134-35
A business partnership can be seen as a forum for dialogue between
the local business community and local governments. The objectives
of these partnerships are to enhance the flow of information and to
promote business opportunities and joint activities between local
governments and the private sector.
Business partnerships are alternatives to full privatization in which
local governments and private sector companies assume initiative
and co-responsibility in focussing on the sustainability and
environmental effect of private firms. Through effective and equal
partnerships, the advantages of the private sector - dynamism,
access to finance, knowledge of technologies, managerial efficiency,

28
entrepreneurial spirit - are combined with the social responsibility,
environmental awareness, local knowledge and job generation
concerns of local governments.
Partnerships are a central feature in any project, from development
of the idea to the actual implementation. As a result, business
partnerships ensure the build-up of a body of expertise on the issues,
which in turn allow functions to be carried out efficiently, reliably,
and profitably. There are certain circumstances in which it is
advantageous to have local governments, communities and the
private sector play active roles, thus bringing to bear the strengths of
each sector in resolving urban and larger environmental problems.
The above discussion is in line with current trends to place emphasis
on the civil society at large, with local governments, businesses, and
the community forming its three 'legs' that support it. Active
involvement and participation of all the three components are
essential for the success of any local/urban initiative.

29
Figure 2, the tree legs of sustainable actors

While local governments have used environmental management

systems as a part of the international Organisation for
standardisation (ISO) and other tools to promote environmental
sustainability in businesses and other entities. Businesses have
similarly used management concepts such as corporate social
responsibility (CSR) and a number of other tools, including ISO itself,
to be more sustainable.
Successful business partnerships have been built on existing schemes
of cooperation, without creating 'new bureaucracies' and have
helped create clearer lines of communication to prevent duplication
of efforts and meet new locally defined needs. Existing groups such
as chambers of commerce, guilds, business associations have played
an important role in sustaining partnerships.
According to Hari Srinivas (2016); a review of case studies and good
practices was done, along with informal interviews, with local
government officials, during a meeting in Esfahan, Iran, on the theme

30
of urban governance. This resulted in the development of a macro
policy framework to foster business partnerships. The policies are
clustered around three clusters of issues: (1) legislation, rules,
manufacturing, subcontracting etc. (2) infrastructure provision and
special incentives; and (3) research, education and training, and
business support services.
The framework looks at the intersection of two critical themes that
have emerged recently - growing concern for a sustainable local
environment, and focus on stronger local governance, both of which
are intrinsically linked together in urban areas. Recognising this, the
document looks at these two issues specifically from the view point
of partnerships between local businesses and the local government
aiming towards sustainability of the local environment.
Sustainable Local Environments
'Environment' means different things to different people. For some,
it means separating garbage into burnable and non-burnable items.
To others it means saving on electricity or using less water. The term
'environment' may be associated with restoring the vitality of
tropical rain forests, maintaining biodiversity and arresting
desertification. Developing healthy, sustainable and safe
communities becomes important to yet others. The environment
also means agricultural and industrial production that is sound and
'green'. Some associate man-made chemical and nuclear hazards
with concrete environmental policies. All of these views are right in
their own way, and are united in its concern for the effects that the
environment has on the day-to-day lives of current and future
generations.
The concerns and problems associated with the environment have
place d such issues high on the agenda of bilateral and multilateral
meetings. The 1992 Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro managed to
highlight and channel global efforts in understanding and acting on

31
environmental problems, making it a key issue to be tackled in trade
and commerce, in economic and social development, and in science
and technology. These messages were further enhanced and
expanded in the two Earth Summits that followed, in 2002 at Jo'burg
(Rio+10), and in 2012 again at Rio de Janerio (Rio+20). Other
summits and congresses such as the Social Summit and the Beijing
Conference on Women in 1995, the City Summit/Habitat II in 1996,
not to mention innumerable regional, national and local meetings, all
have had the larger global environment as a key common
denominator in its action plans. (Hari Srinivas, 2016).
It is only in the last 50 years or so that a better understanding of the
effects of changing environments and ecosystems have been
developed. Interconnectedness of these factors has forced particular
attention on human lifestyles and living conditions that has had a
profound effect on its surroundings. Most, if not all, environmental
problems that we currently face can be traced back to the legacy of
lifestyles that we are inheriting and leading as human beings.
Nowhere is this more true than in concentrations of urban lifestyles
that are becoming a key choice for the majority of humanity.
Urban lifestyles and consumption patterns have far-reaching and
long-term effects not only on its immediate boundaries, but also on
the entire region in which it is positioned. Cities and towns in most
countries around the world have been gaining considerable attention
due to the large number of households migrating to cities and its
consequent effects [UNEP 2012]. It has also been due to the
centrality of goods and services that cities offer, emerging over the
last few decades as the major form of settlement.
By the turn of this century, we will be witness to a ubiquitous
scenario where more people will live in and around cities than in
rural areas. Proximity to decision-makers and financial markets, large
pools of skilled and unskilled workers, and other advantages have
made such urban areas the engines of growth for the countries and
32
regions where they are situated. For example, despite the
environmental and social problems that it is facing, Bangkok's
contribution to the national GDP has been estimated to be more
than the combined output of all other cities in Thailand.
The result of this has been the explosive growth of urban areas,
bringing with it a host of negative effects. Population concentration
in increasingly smaller land masses has caused a drastic decline in
the quality of living both in the residential and work fronts. Cities
have, in effect, become a barometer of humankind's progress into
the 21st century, whether this is an upward or downward trend.
Such a scenario has had ripple effects on a variety of sectors such as
education, health, labour/job markets, and economic activities
[UNESCAP 2015].
The growth and effect of an urban area should be seen not only in
terms of its immediate boundaries, but also in terms of the resources
necessary to sustain its population. An illustrative example is that of
the Greater London area. The land mass that generates the
resources necessary to sustain the population of London, called the
'urban footprint,' is actually slightly less than the entire land area of
UK! This illustrates the complex interrelationship and
interdependence of urban areas and their surrounding hinterland.
According to the Earth Council's report, "Ecological Footprints of
Nations" Japanese lifestyles generate a demand for 6.25 hectare per
capita (for resources such as energy, arable land, pasture, forest,
built-up area, etc.). But the supply has been only 1.88 hectare per
capita. This leaves a 'ecological deficit' of 4.37 hectare per person
that has to be met from outside the country. The conurban region of
Tokyo had a 1995 population of 26.8 million. For Tokyo alone, this
ecological deficit is equal to 116,242,000 hectare or 3.07 times the
total land area of Japan. This becomes 9.2 times the land area of
Japan if only habitable land is taken into account (excluding
mountains, water bodies etc.)
33
The effects of urban activities have in many cases outweighed the
relative advantages of agglomeration and centrality that they
offered. Thus, along with the benefits of urbanization come
environmental and social ills, including lack of access to drinking
water and sanitation services, pollution and carbon emissions etc. A
wide variety of urban problems can be observed, grouped under two
broad contradictive classes, those associated with poverty and those
associated with economic growth and affluence.
Urban areas present a series of trade-offs - for example, between
greater convenience and higher costs, between proximity and
congestion, between better communications and busier lives.
Balancing and bringing together these different issues to aim at
sustainable local environments remains a key challenge that has
many regional and global repercussions.
Stronger Local Governance
Simply put, governance is the science of decision-making. The
concept of governance refers to the complex set of values, norms,
processes, and institutions by which society manages its
development and resolves conflict, formally and informally. It
involves the state, but also the civil society (economic and social
actors, community-based institutions and unstructured groups, the
media etc.) at the local, national, regional and global levels.

Figure 3, characteristics of good governance (source UNDP)

34
Governance refers to the process whereby elements in society wield
power and authority, and influence and enact policies and decisions
concerning public life, and economic and social development.
Governance is a notion that is broader than government, whose
principal elements include the constitution, legislature, executive
and judiciary. Governance involves interaction between these formal
institutions and those of civil society. Governance has no automatic
normative connotation. However, typical criteria for assessing
governance in a particular context might include the degree of
legitimacy, representativeness, interdependence, popular
accountability, compliance, transparency and efficiency with which
public affairs are conducted [UNDP 1999].
There is no alternative to working together and using collective
power of disparate actors and objectives to create a better world.
Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions,
public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing
process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be
accommodated and co-operative action can be taken. It includes
formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance,
as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either
have agreed to, or perceive to be in their interest.
Examples of governance at the local level include a neighbourhood
co-operative formed to install and maintain a standing water pipe, a
town council operating a waste recycling scheme, a multi-urban body
developing an integrated transport plan together with user groups, a
stock exchange regulating itself with national government oversight,
and a regional initiative of state agencies, industrial groups, and
residents to control deforestation. At the global level, governance
has been viewed primarily as intergovernmental relationships, but it
must now be understood as also involving non- governmental
organizations (NGOs), citizens' movements, multinational
corporations, and the global capital market. Interacting with these

35
are global mass media of a dramatically enlarged influence.
Governance refers to the process whereby elements in society wield
power and authority, and influence and enact policies and decisions
concerning public life, and economic and social development.
Governance is a notion that is broader than government, whose
principal elements include the constitution, legislature, executive
and judiciary. Governance involves interaction between these formal
institutions and those of civil society. Governance has no automatic
normative connotation. However, typical criteria for assessing
governance in a particular context might include the degree of
legitimacy, representativeness, interdependence, popular
accountability, compliance, transparency and efficiency with which
public affairs are conducted [UNDP 1999].
There is no alternative to working together and using collective
power of disparate actors and objectives to create a better world.
Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions,
public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing
process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be
accommodated and co-operative action can be taken. It includes
formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance,
as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either
have agreed to, or perceive to be in their interest.
Examples of governance at the local level include a neighbourhood
co-operative formed to install and maintain a standing water pipe, a
town council operating a waste recycling scheme, a multi-urban body
developing an integrated transport plan together with user groups, a
stock exchange regulating itself with national government oversight,
and a regional initiative of state agencies, industrial groups, and
residents to control deforestation. At the global level, governance
has been viewed primarily as intergovernmental relationships, but it
must now be understood as also involving non- governmental
organizations (NGOs), citizens' movements, multinational

36
corporations, and the global capital market. Interacting with these
are global mass media of a dramatically enlarged influence.

Figure 4, partnership that help business to contribute to sustainable development

Thus, a strong local governance system lies at the root of local urban
development, working as a common dinominator for a variety of
urban functions. It is important to understand the broad nature of
the concept of governance, and the interconnectedness of the issues
and actors involved.
Bringing the environment and governance to the local level
To have a lasting and effective impact on sustaining the global
environment, action starts at 'home' - at the local level. The above
discussion clearly points to the importance of merging good
governance and localizing environmental action (this was indeed the
goal with which the Local Agenda 21 initiative was launched at the
1992 Rio Summit)
There is a need to initiate a process that aims to involve local people
and communities in the design of a way of life that can be sustained
and thus protect the quality of life for future generations. This calls
for integrating the social, environmental and economic aspects of
37
development in order that all future development is 'sustainable'. It
requires all of us to consider the effects - on the local economy, the
local environment and the local community - of every policy,
programme and project, and then to seek a solution that achieves a
realistic balance.
This has to be done in a highly democratic, consensus-building and
empowering process. It should seek to strengthen the role of all
major groups in society, including children, youth and women -
setting out to develop and build on partnerships between groups in
the local community and to make linkages between parallel
processes such as social needs and health for all policy work.
Bridging sustainable environment and good governance at the local
level requires a refocusing on 'quality of life' - which is perhaps a
more friendly term to describe its primary goal. It is a process that
asks those in local government to work in partnership with the local
businesses and the local community to develop a strategy that will
work towards the goal of sustainable development in the twenty-first
century and beyond.
There is a need therefore to highlight the role of local governments
in fostering partnerships with businesses to achieve environmental
sustainability. A working framework has been developed that
positions the various actors, issues, and themes into three distinct
clusters and interlinks them.
A Working Framework for Business Partnerships
Developing a working framework for business partnerships requires
the promotion of greater cooperation and networking between
Asian local governments and businesses. The objective is to (a) share
and transfer success stories and good practices in developing
partnerships for urban development, (b) utilize appropriate and
sustainable technologies and practices, (c) foster research and

38
development in business partnerships, and to identify information
dissemination strategies.
Partnerships do not simply happen. There is a clear need for a macro
level framework to be developed, which will bring together disparate
resources and stakeholders working towards sustainable urban
areas.

39
Figure 5, macro policy frame work for sustainable businesses

The review done as a part of the background research for this

document resulted in the development of a macro policy framework

40
to foster business partnerships. The policies are clustered around
three themes (see Figure 5):
Command and Control/Measure and Manage Cluster covering
legislation, rules, manufacturing, subcontracting etc.
'Hardware' Cluster covering infrastructure provision and special
incentives
Knowledge Management Cluster covering research, education and
training, and business support services.
Emphasis of these clusters have been placed on the role that local
governments have to play in fostering broader and deeper
participation of businesses in urban development and management
for environmental sustainability. The framework presents a broad
picture towards which local governments need to aim. It is also
useful to use the framework to monitor the existing conditions in
urban areas, evaluate the potential environment for business
partnerships and work on areas and issues that are missing or
lacking.
It is important to understand the issues covered in the clusters, and
the actors that will activate them. This is due to three reasons: in
order to emphasize the importance of linkages and interrelationships
between the various issues and actors; the need for a broad range of
interventions and inputs that foster partnerships; and the criticality
of a holistic view that needs to be taken in developing sustainable
business partnerships.
Partnerships inherently entail recognition that no one actor at the
local level can carry out all the functions and provide all the inputs
necessary; and a proactive is necessary approach to develop and
sustain a partnership.
Command and Control/Measure and Manage Cluster

41
There are a number of governance issues that affect the creation of
partnerships for sustainability - related to "command and control"
structures (particularly laws, rules and regulations) within local
governments as well as more broader involvement to "measure and
manage" change.
This cluster covers three issues of legislation, rules etc.; financing;
and manufacturing/ subcontracting.
Legislation and rules need to be put in place to support and foster
business partnerships - local government policies, acts and similar
legal provisions should be provided for. A campaign to educate
businesses in local/national environmental standards, ISO standards.
Means to highlight good practices by a system of awards, fees, fines
etc. can also be used. Besides local, regional and national
governments' role in promulgating the legislation, universities and
research institutions, chambers of commerce etc also have a role to
play in generating greater awareness.
Financing - respecting the 'bottom line' approach of businesses, it is
necessary to have a supportive financial system that incorporates
instruments such as tax incentives, special/targeted and low-interest
loans, microfinance for SMEs, subsidies and grants for capital
investment etc.
Manufacturing and subcontracting - while it is difficult to play a
direct role in influencing the manufacturing process of local
industries and businesses, local governments do have a role to play
in educating and campaigning both manufacturers and consumers in
environmental issues throughout the lifecycle of a manufactured
product. Besides voluntary initiatives of the industry or firm itself,
chambers of commerce, industry associations, consumer groups, co-
ops etc. have an important role to play in this process.
Hardware Cluster

42
Making sure that the necessary local services are in place (the urban
hardware components) is key to locational and strategic decisions of
businesses, and local governments play a very important role in
influencing such decisions.
The 'Hardware' cluster focuses on providing necessary and adequate
network and social infrastructure facilities for the industry. It also
includes making available special incentives.
Infrastructure Provision - This involves the provision of various
infrastructure facilities such as proper transportation (roads, public
transport, etc.), electricity and water, gas, telecommunications etc.
Many actors have a role to play here - besides local governments
themselves, the private sector, urban planners, commercial banks,
multilateral institutions have a stake in providing adequate urban
infrastructure facilities
Special Incentives - This involves the setting up of special facilities
such as export processing zones, tax-free zones, special land leases,
industrial parks etc. that also double as showcases for environmental
friendly industries.
Knowledge Management Cluster
Providing the right information to the right catalyst in order to take
action is critical, particularly in addressing problems, and the use of
appropriate policies to bridge problems and solutions.
The Knowledge Management cluster focuses on the 'software' part
of the framework, by enabling research education and training,
information dissemination, awareness building, and other business
support services.
Research, Education and Training - This issue cuts across a broad
spectrum of actors and activities, and covers targeted on-the-job
training, demonstration projects, vocational training, research and
learning, good/best practices documentation etc. With education

43
and awareness building being the key activity, a wide range of actors
from NGOs and community groups, universities and research
institutions, industry associations and chambers of commerce, have
a role to play in facilitating greater participation for environmental
action.
Business Support Services - These services are targeted directly at
businesses and industry, and provides key information, market
research, new technology information, consumer information etc. in
order for businesses to make an informed choice towards
environmentally friendly manufacturing and business practices.
2.2.5 Is Decentralization the key to improved service delivery in local authorities in
Zambia?
Decentralization refers to the transfer of state/national
responsibilities or functions from central government to sub-national
levels of government, or from central agencies/offices to regional
bodies or branch offices, or to non-governmental organizations or
private concerns. It can be described as “the redefinition of
structures, procedures and practices of governance to be closer to
the citizenry”.
Advantages/benefits of Local Government/decentralization
Decentralization, which is best manifested in strong, autonomous
and vibrant systems of local government, offers numerous benefits
or advantages as a model of governance/public administration which
is able to address the many challenges and trends which presently
confront Zambian government, and which are enumerated above.
The advantages/benefits of decentralization assume that
decentralization takes the form of a strong, autonomous and
participatory model of local governance, which enjoys extensive and
real powers for local self-management, and for spearheading the
local sustainable development process. (Miller, Keith, 2000).

44
1. Decentralization, including substantial fiscal decentralization,
provides a framework which facilitates and stimulates local
sustainable development throughout all regions of the country, of
the following:
 Fiscal decentralization will reverse current practice which
extracts resources from the periphery and concentrates these
at the centre. One such authority on budgeting and public
finance for local authorities, namely Gerasimos A. Gianakis , et
al wrote:

 “The public organization often drives the local budget process.

The resource allocation processes of local governments center
on substantive service delivery programs based in agencies
under the authority of the chief executive, rather than on
entitlement or other transfer payment programs. Most
importantly, local budgets must balance, and local government
policy makers cannot consider expenditures apart from
revenues. Local government budgeting is thus revenue driven,
in that the revenue constraint generally dominates decision-
making.” page 4
Thus more resources will be retained at the local level, and will
help to enhance/stimulate local economies and be available to
support local development initiatives.
 More functions will now be performed at the local level,
thereby creating opportunities for locals with technical,
managerial and leadership skills to remain in the region, thus
reducing the rural/urban brain-drain, and enhancing local
capacity to manage local affairs and spearhead local
development.
 Devolution enables each region to take initiatives for their own
development, as they see fit. In doing so, they will know of the
opportunities, indigenous resources and comparative

45
 advantages on which development can be based. Development
is therefore driven locally, rather than by external agents who
are pre-occupied with many other priorities, and know little
about local potential for development.
 Planning for local sustainable development is effected through
a participatory process in which the partners forge a collective
vision for local development, agree on common goals, and on
strategies/ plans for achieving the goals and realizing the vision.
Devolution is essential to this approach, and development
plans produced through such a process will enjoy full
support/commitment of the local community, and therefore is
very likely to be realized, unlike the usual fate of centrally
produced plans.
2. Devolution represents the most effective means of curbing
excessive concentration of power at the centre, which is a distinctive
feature of the existing governance model, and which is inimical to
several basic tenets of good governance, e.g. openness,
transparency, fairness and probity. Specific benefits include:
 Devolution creates many sub-centres from which power is
exercised It reduces the amount of resources /aspects of
national life that are directly controlled/influenced by central
authorities, and hence reduces the extent to which central
government is able to exercise dominance over all aspects of
public affairs.
 Devolution leads to each region/locality being able to articulate
its own interests/perspectives, which might differ from those of
the centre or other regions/localities, thus creating a plurality of
interests/ perspectives. The centre will no longer monopolize
public policy formulation, and new power centres will serve to
promote/protect regional interests. Political representatives will
now have to show greater loyalty to the interests/views of their
local constituents, rather than to the central party machinery.
 Conferring power to local jurisdictions to manage local affairs
will make it more difficult for any single group, be it government
46
 or private interests, to dominate the national scene; and will
increase chances that persons/groups of differing persuasions
will occupy positions of power somewhere in the system.
3. Decentralization facilitates greater popular participation in
governance, as illustrated by the following.
 It brings government closer to the people, and thus enables
citizens to be better informed and to better understand the
conduct of public business. This facilitates the forging of a
strong relationship between the governors and the governed
and identification of the people with their government, which
helps to reduce alienation from the political process. It also
serves to reduce disruptive/anti-social behaviour by citizens in
seeking to get their concerns addressed, or taken into
consideration.
 Placing responsibility for managing local affairs and for local
sustainable development at the local level rather than central
government will afford citizens greater access to, and ability to
influence, the policy/ decision-making process. Civil society will
now consider local government to be worthwhile partners, as
they will be easily accessible, and will have the resources and
authority to respond to representations.
 It provides a conducive environment for creation of a civic
culture of cooperation, tolerance and trust among the various
groups/elements which comprise the local society.
 Communities will find it easier to pursue their development
objectives, and obtain support from local government, by their
participation as a full partner in the local governance process.
 It facilitates/stimulates the growth/empowerment of civil
society institutions and networks, as citizens perceive the
benefits of working in collaboration with local government, to
advance their interests. They will therefore organize themselves
into appropriate organizational forms, to pursue that objective.
4. Decentralization increases efficiency in determining service
provision. In a decentralized, participatory system, citizens can
influence decisions about service provision through mechanisms

47
which enable them to indicate the type, level, quality and mix of
services they desire, and the cost they are willing to pay for such
services. This constitutes a type of market mechanism for
determining service provision in a manner which responds to
the wishes of citizens, and is sensitive to their willingness/ability
to pay. This will not only optimize citizen satisfaction, but is also
an excellent mechanism for reconciling citizens expectations to
the resources available and/or the price which they are
prepared to pay for the services desired.
5. Decentralization facilitates a better division of labour in the
management of public affairs.
The creation of strong local governments with the capacity to
effectively manage local affairs enables central government to
concentrate on higher level functions. This both improves
efficiency and creates more effective checks and balances. A
major weakness of public administration in the Caribbean is the
neglect of high level functions such as policy formulation,
strategic planning, setting standards and monitoring, because
central agencies are pre-occupied with operational level
matters, while neglecting areas which could make a qualitative
difference in public management. Devolution allows each level
of government to focus on the aspects of public management
which it is best suited to perform.
6. Decentralization facilitates the tailoring of solutions for local
problems to local conditions. Since each region is empowered to
manage their own affairs, they will be able to tailor programmes
or solutions to local problems to reflect the special
circumstances or preferences of their respective
regions/localities.
7. Decentralization, manifested in a participatory style of local
governance, fosters greater social cohesion and stability, and
encourages reconciliation between local interest groups and a
convergence around common interests. This process of
participation helps to create the conditions for collaboration
and working together as is indicated by the following:

48
 It brings the various stakeholders together and helps foster
better understanding of each other, thereby reducing suspicion
and mistrust and creating a framework for collaboration and
cooperation.
 It provides a framework and conducive environment for
reconciling conflicting interests, long-standing prejudices and
other differences which have served as barriers in the past.
 It facilitates recognition of mutual self-interest, i.e. that the
attainment of the goals of each group will only be achieved and
sustained with the support of the other groups, therefore the
need for cooperation. It helps to highlight and bring to the fore
the commonality of interests, values, goals, and aspirations
which are shared by the different groups, and which usually far
outweigh any differences.
8. Decentralization provides the opportunity for a wider
diversity of innovations, and increases flexibility of government
in the context of changing circumstances. This is so because the
decentralized, participatory model of governance mainstreams
the many groups/citizens who were previously excluded, and
creates greater scope for local and community self-
management. This means that the vast reservoir of talent,
innovativeness, creativity, problem-solving capacity and
leadership qualities which have previously laid dormant in the
local population is now able to find expression, and can be
applied to the problems, visions and aspirations of the local
community, and will also be available to contribute to nation
building. Such diversity/flexibility are important pre-conditions
for significant policy and pragmatic changes.
9. Decentralization facilitates the mobilization of local resources
in support of the development process, and enables value-
added contributions to the provision of services and
development efforts, which increases the total value of services
provided, or development achieved, from the limited formal
resources available. This happens because local people are able
to identify and mobilize local/indigenous resources which would

49
 not be available to centrally run programmes, and because
citizens are often willing to volunteer free labour and expertise,
and other forms of in-kind contributions, in order to support
local initiatives.
10. Decentralization promotes pluralism and dynamism in the
society. The fact that there are now other centres of power and
influence, and that each has the authority and means of
pursuing its special interest and perspectives, will invariably lead
to greater pluralism and dynamism in the society.
11. Decentralization broadens the potential for societal capacity
building. Weak capacity is one of the main constraints to
national development and good governance in the Caribbean.
The authoritarian, over-centralized model of governance/public
administration is a major inhibitor to capacity development,
because it narrows the amount of people who are allowed any
meaningful role in the process. A decentralized, participatory
model of governance dramatically increases the opportunity for
involvement, and provides space for persons to contribute at
several different levels.
12. A decentralized, participatory model of local governance
fosters accountability, transparency & openness, and create
pressure for the adoption of high ethical standards in the
conduct of public affairs. Examples of how the model
contributes to achieving these tenets of good governance are as
follows:
 In this model, citizens/civil society play an active role in
policy/decision-making in respect of service provision and other
aspects of local governance, and therefore share information
and have a good understanding of the issues and facts relating
to such matters. This gives them the knowledge base to critically
appraise the performance of local government in these areas.
 To induce civil society participation, local governments
practicing this model will usually adopt measures to promote
accountability, openness, & transparency in the conduct of their
affairs, such as: coopting civil society representatives to their

50
 committees; opening meetings of Councils /committees to the
public/media, and/or broadcasting their proceedings; holding
town meetings; discussing budget options with citizens;
publishing annual/periodic reports; etc.
 In such models, LED Planning is a local responsibility which is
carried out in a participatory manner, with civil society playing a
prominent role. Civil society will therefore be full informed on
the issues, trends, options, and prospects affecting or relating to
the region/locality, and thus can use that knowledge to assess
the state of local affairs, and performance of the authorities.
 The model allows for representatives of civil society to be
appointed to carry out oversight functions on behalf of citizens,
i.e. to examine transactions, enquire into use of public
resources and the exercise of authority by public officials, and to
report their findings to fellow citizens.
2.2.6 How can councils help in boosting the capacity and levels of wealth and worth of
its local citizens to ensure their effective contribution to local development and
ultimately service delivery?
Local governments are a diverse sector; ranging from very large
metropolitan to smaller rural organisations. Consequently, councils
differ in the wide range of services they provide. Association of local
governance auditors (ALGA) argues that local government
contributes to economic development through a range of policy
measures, including: Planning and coordination. , Supporting local
businesses, Providing infrastructure, Identifying investment
opportunities, Promoting tourism, cultural and recreational activities
and incentives for investment (Jones 2008: 29).
The varied roles of local government in local and regional economic
development: key considerations and challenges
Figure 4 below shows a wide variety of roles that local governments
play in the promotion, facilitation and support of local and regional
economic development. These cut-across the organisation for
economic corporation and development (OECD) classifications of
representation, services, regulation, and development and
51
investment (Clark, Huxley & Mountford 2010). A high-level summary
of stakeholder perspectives of local government’s economic
development roles according to Clark, Huxley & Mountford (2010) ;
Infrastructure and assets
 Infrastructure development and maintenance.
 Connecting business with infrastructure e.g. councils may
own airports, have primary responsibility for roads, provide
ICT technology etc.
 Develop and implement large scale projects in collaboration
with other levels of government and with funding from state
and federal agencies.
 Use of assets (e.g. buildings) to promote economic
development.

Land use planning

 Devising ‘business-friendly’ and ‘fast-track’ planning
procedures and systems.
 Working with businesses to help them negotiate council
requirements particularly with regard to planning
applications.
 Developing Master Plans to support economic growth and
sustainability.

Supporting businesses

 Acting as a ‘shop front’ for investors and other levels of

government.
 Grants for small business (e.g. innovation grants).
 Whole-of-council approach to help support the attraction and
development of business.
 Facilitating communication between businesses and council.

52
Collaboration/networking
 Facilitate networking, learning and opportunities for
collaboration amongst economic actors.
 Create governance structures, partnerships and forums to
foster collaboration.

Lobbying and promotion

 Lobbying state and federal government for support,

investment and resources.
 Promoting their area to a broader audience (e.g. tourists,
investors etc.).

Strategies and plans

 Strategic planning processes, workforce planning and the

production of economic strategies and associated documents.

Business case development, evidence and information

 Undertaking feasibility and capacity studies.

 Develop business cases.
 Sector-based research, business surveys, data gathering and
monitoring, including economic profiles and economic
assessments.
 Stakeholder mapping exercises.

2.3 RESEARCH VARIABLES ARISING FROM LITERATURE

53
Positive Change was observed when citizens and central government
participated in local government decision making. Moreover,
transfer of state responsibilities from central government to sub-
national levels of government to regional bodies or branch offices, or
to non-governmental organizations or private concerns has been
observed yielding results. Furthermore, Planning and coordination,
Supporting local businesses, providing infrastructure, Identifying
investment opportunities, Promoting tourism, cultural and
recreational activities and incentives for investment boosts the
capacity and levels of worth of its local citizens to ensure their
effective contribution to local development and ultimately service
delivery.
Conceptual Model

Figure 6, Conceptual frame work of the study

54
CHAPTER THREE

3.0 METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN

3.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses the methodology and design of the research.

It brings forth; research approach which was both inductive and
deductive. Research strategy which in this case survey was a priority.
The chapter also alludes to data collection which shows sampling
frame, sample size and sampling techniques. SPSS has been
identified to be the most appropriate tool for data analysis. The
diagram below show what this whole chapter is about;

55
 literature
review

comperative
data
collection

development of
appropriate tools and
validation

Figure 7, validation of concept

3.2 RESEARCH APPROACH

The research was both inductive and deductive. It was inductive

because own theories were formulated using collected data. It was
deductive in a way that other theories were tested basing own the
topic.

3.3 RESEARCH STRATEGY

Survey and case study strategies were used where 60 questionnaires

were distributed amongst the respondents. 20 questionnaires were
answered by employees from Itezhi – Tezhi council in central
province. Another batch of 20 questionnaires was distributed among
Luangwa council employees in Lusaka province. The remaining 20
questionnaires were answered by councillors from respective
councils.

56
3.4 SAMPLING FRAME

Two (02) districts from different provinces were sampled i.e. Itezhi
Tezhi in central province and Luangwa from Southern province. To
have tangible data, councillors from different political parties were
also involved. Therefore, this resulted into production of 60
questionnaires; where batches of 20 questionnaires were distributed
for each sampled districts and councillors.

s e le c ti o n o f s a m p le c o u n c ils

MAIN
c o lle c ti o n o f d a t a t h r o u g h u s e
STUDY THEME/
o f q u e s ti o n a ir e s
TOPIC

c o m p ila ti o n a n d a n a ly s is o f
d a ta

a p p lic a ti o n a n d r e c o m e n d a ti o n s

Figure 8, data collection process

3.5 SAMPLE SIZE, SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

57
The sample size was 20 respondents from Itezhi Tezhi district in
central province, 20 respondents from Luangwa in southern province
and 20 councillors from different districts. Non-probability sampling
techniques (convenient, quota and snowball sampling techniques)
were used.
3.6 OPERATIONALIZATION OF RESEARCH VARIABLES

Sustainable Approach – involves provision of superior sustainable

solutions together with customers and suppliers through active
engagement of society.
Service delivery – involves principles, standards, policies and
constraints to be used to guide the designs, development,
deployment, operation and retirement of services delivered by
service provider with a view to offering a consistent service
experience to a specific user community in a specific business.
Local authority – also referred to as a municipal authority, is a term
that refers to a rural and urban political subdivision below the
national level which is constituted by law and has substantial control
of local affairs, and which includes authorities in counties,
municipalities, cities, villages and others.
Local government (LG) – is the public administration of towns, cities,
counties and district. This type of government include both county
and municipal government structures.
Central government – is the government that holds absolute
supremacy over a unitary state.
Citizen – is a person owing loyalty to and entitled by birth or
naturalisation to the protection of the state or union
Economic growth – is the increase in GDP with time

58
Economic development – In general, economic development is
usually the focus of federal, state, and local governments to improve
our standard of living through the creation of jobs, the support of
innovation and new ideas, the creation of higher wealth, and the
creation of an overall better quality of life. Economic development is
often defined by others based on what it is trying to accomplish.
Many times these objectives include building or improving
infrastructure such as roads, bridges, etc.; improving our education
system through new schools; enhancing our public safety through
fire and police service; or incentivizing new businesses to open a
location in a community.

3.7 DATA COLLECTION TECHNIQUES

Data were collected using questionnaire embedded with closed and

open questions.

3.8 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS

Data were analysed quantitatively using the statistical package for

social science (SPSS) and summarised as shown below;
Conclusions and recommendations
The table below shows a summary of the thematic areas and focus of
study and how selected sources justified the outcome:

ITEM THEMATIC AREA REFERENCE ISSUES ADDRESSED

1 CITIZENS ROLE IN SERVICE DELIVERY (Add) Need for citizens to pay

Participation in decision
making processes
Synergies NGOs
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENTS ROLE IN Counterpart funds
SERVICE DELIVERY Policy frameworks
Autonomy of councils IGFA

59
 3 BUSINESS APPROACH TO LOCAL Synergies with research
SERVICE DELIVERY entities, banks, chambers
of commerce ,financiers

4 BUSINESS APPROACH TO LOCAL Promotion of regional

SERVICE DELIVERY development agenda based
on comparative advantages

5 LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Development of SME

APPROACH TO SERVICE DELIVERY capacity and appropriate
technologies that seek local
solutions to environmental
challenges etc

As stated in the study, most of the Local authorities’ mandates and

functions had been taken up by central government, citing lack of
human resource capacity at local level.
In the process local authorities have lost their relevance to society as
observed by some scholars:
“Revolt, devolution, debt and globalism have precipitated a
reemphasis on research at the state and local government levels,
where traditional budget theory has enjoyed limited relevance.
Efforts to build theories of public budgeting have historically focused
on the national level, and these efforts have simply not produced
theories that have utility for local government practitioners.” page 2,
Local government budgeting: a managerial approach by Gerasimos A.
Gianakis, Clifford P. McCue.
However recent experience in Zambia has shown that lack of
capacity at local level has been fully addressed through devolution of
key central government functions and transfer of the accompanying
staff from line ministry departments at district level to the councils.
In this study therefore, it was imperative that a business case was
made to prove whether councils are capable of operating a social but
somewhat business oriented approach to service delivery.
The thematic areas highlighted in the table above gives an overview
of the main areas where solutions can be found.

60
CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

“Intrinsic to the notion of governance is the necessity for ‘joined-up’

government, both in the sense of concertation at a specific spatial
level – the local, for example – between state agencies (as well as
with market and civil society organisations), but also in the sense of
vertical concertation between tiers of the state .”Paul Smyth et al-
pp19(2005)
Data about; ‘How can citizens share responsibility for the level of
service provided by individual local authorities’?, ‘How can central
government contribute to local government service delivery’?, ‘What
are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the current local
government financing system’?, ‘How can local authorities operate

61
as business entities and still maintain their position as non-profit
making organizations without creating a serious conflict of interest
with the local business fraternity’?, ‘Is Decentralization the key to
improved service delivery in local authorities in Zambia’ and ‘How
can councils help in boosting the capacity and levels of wealth and
worth of its local citizens to ensure their effective contribution to
local development and ultimately service delivery’? Were collected
and presented using histograms, bar charts and pie charts as below;

4.2 PRESENTATION OF QUALITATIVE QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS

Table 1, distribution by gender

Statistics

Gender

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 1.35

Median 1.00

Mode 1

Std. Deviation .481

Variance .231

Skewness .645

62
Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 1

Minimum 1

Maximum 2

Gender

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid MALE 39 65.0 65.0 65.0

FEMALE 21 35.0 35.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 9, distribution by gender

Table 2, statistics by age group

Statistics

Age group

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 4.52

Median 5.00

Mode 5

Std. Deviation 1.000

63
Variance 1.000

Skewness -.153

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 3

Minimum 3

Maximum 6

Age group

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid 25-29 12 20.0 20.0 20.0

30-34 15 25.0 25.0 45.0

40-44 23 38.3 38.3 83.3

50 and above 10 16.7 16.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 10, age group

Table 3, statistics by highest qualification

Statistics

What is your highest qualification?

64
N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 1.93

Median 2.00

Mode 2

Std. Deviation .516

Variance .267

Skewness -.106

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 2

Minimum 1

Maximum 3

What is your highest qualification?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Certificate 10 16.7 16.7 16.7

Diploma 44 73.3 73.3 90.0

Degree 6 10.0 10.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

65
Figure 11, qualification

Table 4, distribution by department

Statistics

Which department do you belong to?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 2.02

Median 2.00

Mode 1

Std. Deviation 1.308

Variance 1.712

Skewness 1.425

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 4

Minimum 1

66
Maximum 5

Which department do you belong to?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Administration 26 43.3 43.3 43.3

Finance 24 40.0 40.0 83.3

Legal 3 5.0 5.0 88.3

Engineering 7 11.7 11.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 12, department

How can citizens share responsibility for the level of service

provided by individual local authorities?
Table 5, Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by individual local authorities

Statistics

Do citizens share responsibility over the level of

services provided by individual local
authorities?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

67
Mean 2.25

Median 2.00

Mode 3

Std. Deviation .773

Variance .597

Skewness -.470

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 2

Minimum 1

Maximum 3

Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by individual

local authorities?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid NO 12 20.0 20.0 20.0

SOMEWHAT 21 35.0 35.0 55.0

YES 27 45.0 45.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 13, Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by individual local authorities

68
Table 6, Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided by local authority?

Statistics

Are citizens willing to share responsibility for

the level of service provided by local authority?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 2.33

Median 2.00

Mode 2

Std. Deviation .774

Variance .599

Skewness 1.152

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 3

Minimum 1

Maximum 4

Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided by local
authority?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Strongly Agree 3 5.0 5.0 5.0

Agree 42 70.0 70.0 75.0

Indifferent 7 11.7 11.7 86.7

Disagree 8 13.3 13.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

69
Figure 14, Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided by local authority?

Table 7, after how long does local authority sensitize citizens about what they are supposed to do over services
offered?

Statistics

After how long does local authority sensitize

citizens about what they are supposed to do
over services offered?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 3.57

Median 4.00

Mode 4

Std. Deviation 1.345

Variance 1.809

Skewness -1.228

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 4

Minimum 1

70
Maximum 5

After how long does local authority sensitize citizens about what they are
supposed to do over services offered?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Never 12 20.0 20.0 20.0

Quarterly 38 63.3 63.3 83.3

Yearly 10 16.7 16.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 15, after how long does local authority sensitize citizens about what they are supposed to do over services
offered?

How can central government contribute to local government

service delivery?
Table 8, does central government contribute to local government service delivery

Statistics

Does central government contribute to local

government service delivery?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 2.17

Median 2.00

71
Mode 2

Std. Deviation .376

Variance .141

Skewness 1.835

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 1

Minimum 2

Maximum 3

Does central government contribute to local government service delivery?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Agree 50 83.3 83.3 83.3

Indifferent 10 16.7 16.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 16, does central government contribute to local government service delivery

What are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the current

local government financing system?
Table 9, are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system?

Statistics

Are there drawbacks of the current local

government financing system?

72
N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 1.80

Median 2.00

Mode 2

Std. Deviation .403

Variance .163

Skewness -1.539

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 1

Minimum 1

Maximum 2

Are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid NO 12 20.0 20.0 20.0

YES 48 80.0 80.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 17, are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system?

How can local authorities operate as business entities and still

maintain their position as non-profit making organizations without
creating a serious conflict of interest with the local business
fraternity.
73
Table 10, Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic and social growth of the local
authority?

Statistics

Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place

to sustain the economic and social growth of
the local authority?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 1.53

Median 2.00

Mode 2

Std. Deviation .503

Variance .253

Skewness -.137

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 1

Minimum 1

Maximum 2

Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic

and social growth of the local authority?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid NO 28 46.7 46.7 46.7

YES 32 53.3 53.3 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

74
Figure 18, are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic and social growth of the local
authority?

Table 11, has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects undertaken so that to reduce on
citizen’s financial burden?

Statistics

Has the local authority issued any municipality

bond for some projects undertaken so that to
reduce on citizen’s financial burden?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 1.05

Median 1.00

Mode 1

Std. Deviation .220

Variance .048

Skewness 4.236

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 1

Minimum 1

Maximum 2

Has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects
undertaken so that to reduce on citizen’s financial burden?

75
 Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid NO 57 95.0 95.0 95.0

YES 3 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 19, has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects undertaken so that to reduce on
citizen’s financial burden?

Is Decentralization the key to improved service delivery in local

authorities in Zambia?
Table 12, is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local authorities in Zambia?

Statistics

Is Decentralization the key to improving service

delivery in local authorities in Zambia?

N Valid 60

Missing 0

Mean 1.77

Median 2.00

76
Mode 2

Std. Deviation .427

Variance .182

Skewness -1.294

Std. Error of Skewness .309

Range 1

Minimum 1

Maximum 2

Is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local

authorities in Zambia?

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid NO 14 23.3 23.3 23.3

YES 46 76.7 76.7 100.0

Total 60 100.0 100.0

Figure 20, Is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local authorities in Zambia

77
Table 13, the chi – Square

Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic and
social growth of the local authority? * Has the local authority issued any
municipality bond for some projects undertaken so that to reduce on citizen’s
financial burden? Cross tabulation

Count

Has the local authority issued any

municipality bond for some
projects undertaken so that to
reduce on citizen’s financial
burden?

NO YES Total

Are there entrepreneurial NO 28 0 28

strategies put in place to
YES
sustain the economic and
social growth of the local 29 3 32

authority?

Total 57 3 60

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

Value df sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 2.763a 1 .096

Continuity Correctionb 1.142 1 .285

Likelihood Ratio 3.910 1 .048

Fisher's Exact Test .241 .145

Linear-by-Linear Association 2.717 1 .099

N of Valid Casesb 60

a. 2 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.40.

b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

78
Figure 21, the Chi – Square

79
CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 ANALYSIS OF DATA

5.1 ANALYSIS OF OVERALL FINDINGS

Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided

by individual local authorities?
On the question; (Do citizens share responsibility over the level of
services provided by individual local authorities?) 45% agreed by
saying yes, 35% where not sure and 20% disagreed giving the
standard deviation of 0.772 and mean of 2.25 showing low
coefficient of covariant which means that citizens do not share
responsibility over the level of services provided by individual local
authorities due to the following reasons.
Citizens share responsibility though less participation among citizens.
Other respondents alludes to that Citizens share responsibility
through garbage collection, pay of levies to council and keeping their
community green, clean and health. There are times when the
community mobilises and help with work towards local authorities’
goal.
Greediness and selfishness among citizens ha been observed to be a
hindrance to citizen's participation. The citizen of the community
only share responsibility if they are properly incorporated from the
beginning of any project.
Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided
by local authority?
Data collected show 70% agreee, 5% strongly agree, 11.7% indifferent, and
13.3% disagree. This entails that citizens are willing to share responsibility for
the level of service provided by local authority only that they are not engaged
Respondents further complained that, they shared responsibility that benefited
the local authority alone.
Best practice

80
  Engage citizens in local council policy formulation and implementation
through formation of ward committees. Also putting a deliberate
programme on radio where citizens can call about undone service in the
community. Implement feedback from citizens if in line with local
government principles. The local authority must realise that citizens have
needs hence, programmes meant for them must incorporate basic needs
like shelter and food. Provide entrepreneurial trainings and capital so that
their needs are addressed indirectly while collecting levy.
 Councils must show corporate social responsibility (CRS) in the
communities of their operations. CRS is two tier i.e. restraining from
harming community and also helping communities without expecting
anything from them.
Is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local
authorities in Zambia?
Data collected show that 23.3% said NO, 76.7% said YES; decentralization is
the key to improving service delivery in local authorities. Giving low standard
deviation of 0.427 as compared to 1.77 mean value which leads to low
coefficient of covariant. The majority accepted that decentralization is the key
to improving service delivery in local authorities
Decentralisation allows council to actualise on their priorities i.e. planning for
resources shall be at local level closer to the people. Decentralisation improves
service delivery because its status quo is combating development; when
departments come together with common goals.
Decentralisation according to respondents allows coordination among
departments which promotes efficiency and capacity building.
Decentralisation allows departments to complement each other by working
together which does more good than harm.
Some respondents alluded to that, problems or challenges faced by the
community will be solved within the local authorities. Decentralisation helps
gather information needed for service delivery.
Local communities understand their needs and problems better and have better
solutions to their problems
Best practices
The grants approval process should be speeded up for efficient implementation
of decentralisation. Central government has to fund this process as it is taking
too long to be implemented.
81
In terms of reporting, the process is at play where departments are now
reporting to local authorities. The decentralisation policy has not been clearly
explained to stake holder through sensitisation. Meaning that the local authority
must avail the decentralisation policy to the stake holders.
Sensitisation is vital for implementation of decentralisation policy because it
allows coordination between citizens and the local government.
Capacity building through meetings is also vital for the implementation of
decentralisation policy. Departmental interactive meetings should be held
occasionally.
The local authority has Design and implement mechanisms to ensure a bottom –
up flow of integrated development plan and budget from district to the central
government.
What are the difficulties causing delays in implementing the decentralization
policy?
The decentralisation process is partially funded. Government has not been fully
funded decentralisation.
Also delay of grants from central government has contributed to failed service
delivery. There is delay in implementing decentralisation because there is
conflict of interest and work.
Resistance to change by top management is what is delaying decentralisation
because they fear to be replaced by those who are competent. Some respondents
complained that, administrators entrusted with offices are just there to enrich
themselves and avoid challenges faced by citizens.
Some respondents complained of poor road network as a major factor causing
delay in decentralisation policy implementation.
Best practice or measures in place to ensure full implementation of the
decentralization policy?
Through sensitization by local authority. Meaning citizens have to be
aware of what council is up to. This can be done through formation
of ward committees in all wards. This will make them engaged in
activity, cost, quality and time frame management.
Local authorities to be transparent in line with by – law and also be
held accountable for their inability to implement the policy.

82
How can central government contribute to local government service
delivery?
83.3% and 16.7% of the respondents respectively agreed and
disagreed to the question; “Does central government contribute to
local government service delivery?” 83.3% agreed meaning that
central government contributed to local government service
delivery.
Central government contributed through provision of grants quarterly that
would help local authority to invest in projects for smooth services delivery.
Best practices
Level of education among councillors is necessary for service delivery. Hence,
need to put qualification for those aspiring to be councillors.
Central government can also contribute to local authority service delivery
through material support (machinery, vehicles, graders, tractors etc.).
Central government should provide policy direction which would help local
authority provide legal and institutional framework that promote autonomy in
decision making at local level.
Building capacity for development and maintenance of infrastructure at local
level is yet another aspect that central government can look into.
Moreover, some respondent complained of lack of local survey/technical
support by central government. Central government should consistently carry
survey on the common priorities among local authorities.
Are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system?
48 0f 60 respondents showing 80% accepted that there are drawbacks of the
current local government financing system. Respondents complained that grants
being provided by central government are not enough to finance business
oriented projects. Community development funds are not readily available when
time of need comes.
Communities lack financial capacity for service delivery meaning citizens have
nothing to offer which can enable local authorities operate efficiently.
The current financial system does not involve the community meaning that the
community must be involved at all levels of financial system process.

83
Motoring of revenue collection is not effective as the systems used are old i.e.
direct collection of funds between revenue collectors (council) and clients
(citizens).
What are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the current local
government financing system?
Drawbacks of the current financial system according to respondents
 The grants are not enough to sustain the local authority operations.
 Some respondents said, the central government no longer support local
authority.
 Funding is not consistent making it difficult to forecast. Meaning that
local authority do not know if they would be funded or not.
 Revenue collected is limited for council survival. When there is
inadequate funding, it becomes difficult to plan.
 There is no infrastructure development which can help council to be
productive in the area, for example (markets, schools, clinics, roads).
Community development fund (CDF) does not come on time.
 The staff working in the area of finance are underqualified where they
cannot even make financial and investment decisions. Meaning they lack
corporate and risk management knowledge which they can use to source
for finance.
 The revenue collection system (direct) is ineffective using outdated tools
to collect revenue.
 Sometimes the community might come up with the project which would
be overlooked by local government due to lacunas in current financial
system.
 Misappropriation and misapplication of fund among local authority
officers. Misappropriation involves fraud or money laundering while
misapplication is usage of finance for unintended purposes.
(b) Advantages of the current financial system according to respondents
 The current financial system allows local authority to construct
developmental projects like modern markets, clinics, bus stations and
parking spaces.
 Central government support local authorities through equalisation grants
which has a component of 20% for service delivery. This funding is in
lump sum, it brings about noticeable development.
 Local authorities are able to carry out their administrative activities for
example; purchase of equipment/machinery using collected revenue from

84
 citizens and also issue of municipality bonds which can facilitate service
delivery. Hence, being self-reliant. Bonds can be used to build housing
units, construction of markets, municipality bonds are interest rate free
and serviced by the Implemented project during operations stage.
 Equalisation funds attached to local government financial system help
pay salaries to workers.
 The current financial system has a component of capital projects which
call for debt leverage (equity/debt) meaning local government can borrow
to finance some projects.
 Grants provided in the current financial system of local government are
attached with a lot of conditions making local authority meet targets.
Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic
and social growth of the local authority?
According to data collected 46.7% disagreed while 53.3% agreed that there are
entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic and social growth
of the local authority. This gives standard deviation of 0.503 and mean of 1.53
giving a semi - strong coefficient of covariant meaning that YES strategies are
there but not adequate/competent.
Without central government grants; local authority survive through collecting
revenue from; housing units, guest house and renting other equipment like
grader. Hence, local authorities are challenged by some respondents to be
entrepreneurial by building more housing units and guest houses where they can
be able to collect atleast some revenue at average.
The only other strategy noticed is intensifying collection of fish levy and trading
licences.
Some residents challenged local authorities to issue municipality bonds to
construct modern markets, clinics, housing units, malls, sewerage, night clubs
etc.
Local communities are empowered by devolving decision making authority
function and resources from the centre to the lowest – level with matching
financial resources in order to improve efficiency in the delivery of services
To attain global competency, local authorities were advised to issue
municipality bonds to leverage their capital structure instead of depending on
inconsistent funding from central government and levy from citizens.
Has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects
undertaken so that to reduce on citizen’s financial burden?

85
Data show that, 95% of respondents insisted that their respective local
authorities had never issued any municipality bond. Municipality bonds are
entitlements where every local authority is mandated to issue through central
government. Municipality bonds can be traded at the capital markets with
interest and tax free rate. These bonds facilitate project finance among local
authorities because they are off – balance sheet meaning the projects service
debt using operations cash flows.
How can councils help in boosting the capacity and levels of wealth and
worth of its local citizens to ensure their effective contribution to local
development and ultimately service delivery?
Best practice
Through implementation of by-law as a source of revenue. Implementation of
by – law involves good top leadership, good organisation behaviour and
strategic organisational structure. Sensitising the community about the
importance can also boost capacity and level of wealth and worth of citizens
and effectively contribute to local development and ultimately service delivery.
Formation of ward development committees is necessary. This improves on
reporting and collaboration between local authority and citizens. Ward
development committees will foster Involvement of citizens in decision making
because they are the culprits in the successful service delivery by local
government. This will help them consult citizens about what is needed in their
communities
By promoting entrepreneurship among farmers and citizens who are the sources
of revenue.
Service delivery can be improved through availing rules and guidelines
governing acquisition of land meant for business purposes to stakeholders.
Giving 75% of land to entrepreneurs and 25% to ordinary citizens as residential.
Local government must be attractive to investors if it were to increase revenue
collection. In some cases they can even merge or joint venture with investors so
that to build capability.

CHAPTER SIX

1.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

86
“The complex challenges of combining democratic legitimacy, social
inclusion, environmental sustainability and economic prosperity will
not be solved by a simplistic faith in competitiveness – any more
than by a simplistic faith in central planning or local self-help.” Paul
Smyth et al (2005-pp59).
According to survey, Sustainable Approach to Service Delivery in
Zambian Local Authorities involves provision of superior sustainable
solutions together with customers and suppliers through active
engagement of society.
The current local authority in Zambia does not embrace citizen
participation as evidenced by data collected On the question; (Do
citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by
individual local authorities?) 45% agreed by saying yes, 35% where
not sure and 20% disagreed giving the standard deviation of 0.772
and mean of 2.25 showing low coefficient of covariant which means
that citizens do not share responsibility over the level of services
provided by individual local authorities due to less participation and
greediness and selfishness of top leadership among local authorities.
Survey shows that citizens are willing to share responsibility for the
level of service provided by local authority only when they are
engaged in local council policy formulation and implementation
through formation of ward committees. Also putting a deliberate
programme on radio where citizens can call about undone service in
the community. Implement feedback from citizens if in line with local
government principles. The local authority must realise that citizens
have needs hence, programmes meant for them must incorporate
basic needs like shelter and food. Provide entrepreneurial trainings
and capital so that their needs are addressed indirectly while
collecting levy. Councils must show corporate social responsibility
(CRS) in the communities of their operations. CRS is two tier i.e.
restraining from harming community and also helping communities
without expecting anything from them.
87
Central government plays a bigger role to local authority service
delivery as witnessed by survey where 83.3% and 16.7% of the
respondents respectively agreed and disagreed to the question;
“Does central government contribute to local government service
delivery?” 83.3% agreed meaning that central government
contributed to local government service delivery.
Central government can contribute to local government service
delivery through, putting qualification for those aspiring to be
councillors, material support (machinery, vehicles, graders, tractors
etc.), provide policy direction which would help local authority
provide legal and institutional framework that promote autonomy in
decision making at local level, building capacity for development and
maintenance of infrastructure at local level and providing technical
support.
The current local authority financial system has been observed to
having some draw backs as evidenced by research where 48 0f 60
respondents showing 80% accepted that there are drawbacks of the
current local government financing system. They gave reasons of less
involvement of the community meaning that the community and
motoring of revenue collection is not effective as the systems used
are old i.e. direct collection of funds between revenue collectors
(council) and clients (citizens).
Local authorities can only operate as business entities if they
formulated and implemented modern strategies like that of project
finance. This would allow them issue municipality bond from the
capital markets which are interest and tax free. Old strategies like
depending on levy from old markets, old housing units, and old bus
stations must be discouraged. The collected data shows that local
authorities are not entrepreneurial enough.
Data collected on decentralization being the key to improved service
delivery in local authorities in Zambia show that 23.3% said NO,

88
76.7% said YES; meaning that decentralization is the key to
improving service delivery in local authorities. The majority (76.7%)
accepted that decentralization is the key to improving service
delivery in local authorities. Decentralisation allows council to
actualise on their priorities i.e. planning for resources shall be at local
level closer to the people. Decentralisation improves service delivery
because its status quo is combating development; when
departments come together with common goals. Decentralisation
according to respondents allows coordination among departments
which promotes efficiency and capacity building.
Decentralisation allows departments to complement each other by
working together which does more good than harm. Some
respondents alluded to that, problems or challenges faced by the
community will be solved within the local authorities.
Decentralisation helps gather information needed for service
delivery. Local communities understand their needs and problems
better and have better solutions to their problems when
decentralisation is at play
On the question; ‘How can councils help in boosting the capacity and
levels of wealth and worth of its local citizens to ensure their effective
contribution to local development and ultimately service delivery?’
respondents averred that through implementation of by-law as a
source of revenue, formation of ward development committees is
necessary, promoting entrepreneurship among farmers and citizens,
availing rules and guidelines governing acquisition of land meant for
business purposes to stakeholders, giving 75% of land to
entrepreneurs and 25% to ordinary citizens as residential and also
local government must be attractive to investors

APPENDICES

Appendix A – References

89
Clark, G., Huxley, J. & Mountford, D. (2010). Organising Local
Economic Development: The Role of Development Agencies and
Companies, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Ganesh Prasad Pandeya (2015). Does citizen participation in local
government decision-making contribute to strengthening local
planning and accountability systems? An empirical assessment of
stakeholders’ perceptions in Nepal: International Public
Management Review
Jones, S. (2008), 'Can Australian Local Governments have a Role in
Local Economic Development?: Three Cases of Evidence', Urban
Policy and Research
Miller, Keith (2000). Decentralization, Local Governance and
Community Participation: A Caribbean
Perspective. Unpublished. Kingston, Jamaica.
Edward Elgar (2010). Local Government Finance: The Challenges of
the 21st Century. Second Global Report on Decentralization and
Local Democracy. Cheltenham, UK: Northampton, MA, USA
UNEP (2012), "Global Environmental Outlook (GEO 5)" Narirobu,
Kenya: United Nations Environment Programme.
UN ESCAP and UN-Habitat (2015) "The State of Asian and Pacific
Cities: Urban transformations - Shifting from quantity to quality"
Bangkok: United Nations Economic and Social Commission for the
Asia Pacific
UNDP (1999), "Governance for Sustainable Human Development".
United Nations Development Programme

Appendix B – Questionnaire

THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Serial

90
Numbe
r

Introduction
This questionnaire is only for academic purposes to enable the researcher to
complete studies at ……………………………. Please follow the instructions
and be honest in answering the questions.
Instructions: 1. Please tick [√] in the space next to the question/statement to
indicate your choice. 2. Do not write your name on this questionnaire.

Q1. Gender. Male □ Female □

Q2. Age group 1. 15-19 □ □ 2. 20-24 3. 25-29 □ 4. 30-34 □ 5.

40-44 □ 6. 50 and above □

Q3. What is your highest qualification? 1. Certificate □ 2. Diploma □ 3.

Degree □ 4. Masters □ □5. PhD

Q4. Which department do you belong to? 1. Administration □ 2. Finance

□ 3. Community Development □ 4. Legal □ 5. Engineering □ 6.

Public Health □ 7. Real Estate □ 8. Physical Planning □

91
Q5. Do citizens share responsibility over the level of services provided by

individual local authorities? 1. NO □ 2. SOMEWHAT □ □ 3. YES

Just justify your answer PLEASE

……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………
Q6. Are citizens willing to share responsibility for the level of service provided

by local authority? 1. Strongly Agree □ 2. Agree □ 3. Indifferent □ 4.

Disagree □ 5. Strongly Disagree □

Q7. What do you think should be done to make citizens feel the responsibility
over services offered by local authority?
................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................
..................................................................Q8. After how long does local
authority sensitize citizens about what they are supposed to do over services

offered? 1. Never □ 2. Daily □ 3. Monthly □ 4. Quarterly □ 5.

Yearly □
Q9. Does central government contribute to local government service delivery?

1. Strongly Agree □ 2. Agree □ 3. Indifferent □ 4. Disagree □ 5.

Strongly Disagree □
92
Q10. How can central government contribute to local government service
delivery…………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………
Q11. Are there drawbacks of the current local government financing system? 1.

NO □ □ 2. YES

Please give reason to your observation

……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………..
Q12. What are some of the drawbacks and advantages of the current local
government financing system?
a) Draw backs
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………
b) Advantages
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………
Q13. Are there entrepreneurial strategies put in place to sustain the economic

and social growth of the local authority? 1. NO □ □

2. YES

If yes please list the major ones

……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………

93
Q14. Has the local authority issued any municipality bond for some projects

undertaken so that to reduce on citizen’s financial burden? 1. NO □ 2.

YES □
Q15. Is Decentralization the key to improving service delivery in local

authorities in Zambia? 1. NO □ □ 2. YES

Give some reason to your answer please

……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………….
Q16. What measures are in place to ensure full implementation of the
decentralization policy?
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………
Q17. What are the difficulties causing delays in implementing the
decentralization policy?
……………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………
Q18. How can councils help in boosting the capacity and levels of wealth and
worth of its local citizens to ensure their effective contribution to local
development and ultimately service delivery?
................................................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................
............................................

Thank you for your help…… STAY BLESSED

94
Appendix C – Research Proposal

95