POLSCI06

GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS OF SOUTHEAST ASIA

DECENTRALIZATION ACROSS SOUTHEAST ASIA

Decentralization in Southeast Asia has proceeded slowly and unevenly. It is

widely held that it improves governance quality. Many services such as agriculture,
education, health, social welfare, environmental management and even public works
are increasingly being decentralized in the region in accordance with the principles of
fiscal decentralization. Under a decentralized system, citizens and community groups
can participate better in government affairs. Proximity serves to enhance public service
preferential matching. Moving decision-making closer to those affected by those
decisions reduces both requirements for information costs and transaction costs. By
contrast, a centralized approach to economic management stymies local - level
development. For this reason, it is argued that in less developed public sector
environments a decentralized form of governance is as valid as in advanced, highly
industrialized settings. Southeast Asian nations are dealing with decentralization
through Deconcentration, privatization, devolution, and delegation in many ways.
Decentralization implies that local governments should act on their own rather than
central government agents.

ETHNIC TENSIONS ARE ON THE RISE IN SOUTHEAST ASIA NATIONS

The growth rate can be affected by a high level of ethnic hostilities. The "greater
ethnic tension, the lower the growth rate" was held. The concern is that if international
investors equate ethnic conflict with political instability and pull out of the region, these
economies will go into a steeper tailspin. Access to social services and economic
opportunities is severely curtailed when conflict is prolonged. Some parts of the country
are still inaccessible in Cambodia, for example, even as the security situation has
eased. Government is unable to provide health and education services or basic physical
infrastructure, as a result of which poverty has increased and growth has been slowed
down. Conflict, in turn, exacerbates the challenge of establishing institutions that
benefit broad segments of society. First of all, ethnic groups tend to have a lower
standard of living than most. For successful conflict management, institutions that
benefit the poor are therefore needed.