DEBRE TABOR UNIVESRITY

FACULTY OF SOCIALSCINCE AND HUMANITY

DEPARTMENT OF CIVICS AND ETHICAL STUDY
Assessing the practice and challenges of political decentralization for the development
of grass root democracy in amhara national regional state: (the case of Debre Tabor
Town.)

A senior proposal submitted to department of Civics and Ethical

Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Bachelor of Art (BA) in Civics and Ethical Studies.
BY: Beyenech Shiferie

ID NO; 0049/09

ADVISOR: MuluyeFentaw

NOV, 2014E.C

Debre Tabor Town.

Table of Contents
Acronyms..............................................................................................................................................I

CHAPTER ONE......................................................................................................................................1

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................................1

1.1. Background of the Study............................................................................................................1

1.2. Statement of the Problem..........................................................................................................2

1. 3. Objective of the Study...............................................................................................................2

1.3.1. General Objective................................................................................................................2

1.3. 2. Specific Objectives..............................................................................................................3

1. 4. Research Question.....................................................................................................................3

1. 5. Significance of the Study..........................................................................................................3

1. 6 Scope of the Study....................................................................................................................3

1.7. Limitation of the Study...............................................................................................................3

1.8. Organization of the Paper...........................................................................................................4

CHAPTER TWO.......................................................................................................................................4

2. Literature Review..............................................................................................................................4

2.1 The Concept of Decentralization.................................................................................................4

2.2. Conceptual Framework..............................................................................................................5

2.1.1. Type of Decentralization......................................................................................................6

2.1.3. Characteristics of Decentralization....................................................................................7

2.3. The Practice of Political Decentralization for the Development of Grass Root Democracy........7

2.4. Objective of Political Decentralization........................................................................................8

2.5. Purpose and Feature of Political Decentralization......................................................................8

2.6. Historical Background of Decentralization in Ethiopia................................................................9

2.7. Political Decentralization in Ethiopia........................................................................................10

2. 8. Local Governance and Democracy..........................................................................................12

2.9. Local Level (Woreda) Decentralization.....................................................................................12

3.CHAPTER THREE................................................................................................................................15

3.1. Methodology of Study............................................................................................................15

3.1.1 Description on the Study Area.........................................................................................15

3.1.2. Research Design.................................................................................................................15

3.1.3. Data Source and Types.......................................................................................................15

3.1.4. Instrument of Data Collection..........................................................................................15

3.1.5. Sampling Technique and Sample Size..............................................................................15

3.1.6. Data Analysis and Presentation........................................................................................16

Reference............................................................................................................................................16

Appendix...............................................................................................................................................1
 CHAPTER ONE

1. Introduction
1.1. Background of the Study
Political decentralization can be understood to refer either or both of : Transferring the power
of selecting political leadership and representatives from central governments to local
governments, and Transferring the power and authority of making social, political ,economic
decision from central governments to local governments and communities. It is also popular
governance arrangement aimed at collection the devolution of decision making power and
transferring political responsibility to sub-national governments, the organization among
autonomy of the constituent units is so important that authority and responsibility is
constitutionally shared between the central government and other subsidiary ( subnational )
units of governments ( Bahru, 2006 : 133 ).

The idea of political decentralization has drawn attention and action in Ethiopia over the past
twenty- five years, for varied reasons. With increased demand for further local autonomy in
authoritarian regime decline, empowering local communities to choose appropriate public
polices for their regions has offered the prospect of depending democratic governance.(Ibid).

In the last two decades, decentralization has gained prominence as an expressed goal or as an
actual pursuit in Ethiopia. However, since power of the Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary
[EPRDF] in May 1991, the country has experimented with decentralization with varying
degree of success. The policy of decentralization governments and development is, however,
relatively anew phenomena in Ethiopia political system. During the derge on the other hand,
did not better go than predecessor in decentralizing the country. As a result, Ethiopia was for
seventeen years to highly centralized state structure. Following the down fall of the derg
regime in May 1991, the transitional government of Ethiopia (TGE) was established under
the leadership of the Ethiopia people’s revolutionary democratic front (EPRDF). The country
was divided in to nine self-governing ethno linguistic regional and two autonomous
administrative cites. The Amhara National Regional State is one of the regions constituting
the Ethiopia federation. However, the political decentralization of Debre Tabor Town
administration is aimed to promote the participation of local community in the management
of their own political, social, and economic affairs. Everyone has evolved in the process of its
implementation, monitoring and evaluation practice. Thus the basic rational for
decentralization on both political and economic grounds is the proximity of the government
to the people (Alemu Yimer 2011: 32). Hence, this research will assess the practice and
challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root democracy in
Amhara national regional state the case of Debre Tabor Town.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

Political decentralization encourages the development of local democracy. As some of the
principles of democracy are inclusiveness, transparency, accountability and .openness,
democracy and political decentralization cannot be separated. Political decentralization
particularly in Debre Tabor Town is recently structured and organized in a new manner.
However, it is not fruitful since it is challenged by many factors, such as lack of awareness
and poor on political decentralization, financial dependency of the town, and the way of
representation of town councils. Therefore we are initiated or it motivated to investigate
about the challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root democracy
in Debre Tabor Town

The previous researchers According to Tegne and page, in 1997 explained the role of
Administration Decentralization in promoting local participation Debre Tabor Town and The
pervious researchers According to Eshetu and page, in 2000 explained to identify the main
opportunity political administration decentralization in the study area and to investigate the
extent power in previous studies.

Further, cross country analysis shows have role and opportunities political and administration
decentralization, but those researchers did not studied on the challenges of political
decentralization for the development of grass root democracy in Debre Tabor Town. While
this paper focused on the challenge of political decentralization to fill full this gap of the
previous research. So, the researchers will be aim to investigate the major challenges of
political decentralization in Debre Tabor Town and so to set some recommendations to
minimize such kind of problem.

1. 3. Objective of the Study

1.3.1. General Objective

The overall objective of this study is to assess the practice and challenges of political
decentralization for the development of grass root democracy in Amhara national regional
state the case of Debre Tabor Town.
1.3. 2. Specific Objectives

Based on the above general purpose the following are the specific objectives of the
study.
 To find out the practice of political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy in Debre Tabor Town
 To investigate the institutional and financial capability of Debre Tabor Town
administration in promoting grass root democracy.
 To assess the challenges of political decentralization in promoting grass root
democracy in the town.

1. 4. Research Question
 What does the practice of political decentralization in promoting grass root
democracy in Debre Tabor Town?
 What is the institutional and financial capability of Debre Tabor Town administration
in promoting grass root democracy?
 What are the challenges of political decentralization in fostering grass root
democracy in the town?

1. 5. Significance of the Study

The study will identify problems provide solution to the practice of political decentralization
and its challenge in grass root democracy. It is enable other researcher to conduct research on
political decentralization and its challenge in grass root democracy level in Debre Tabor
Town. To recommended possible solution for the betterment of future implementation of
political decentralization in Debre Tabor Town

1. 6 Scope of the Study

The study will delimit on assessing the practice of political decentralization in promoting
grass root democracy in Debre Tabor Town. The inistituonal and financial capability of
Debre Tabor Town administration in promoting grass root democracy and the challenges of
political decentralization in promoting grass root democracy in the town.

1.7. Limitation of the Study

The fact that the researcher will properly achieved did not guaranty that is makes the
researcher free from constraints the following are some of the Major limitation, lack of
written document, absence of organized data, shortage of time, financial and lack of material
and lack of available internet service those are some of the challenges that faced during the
study.

1.8. Organization of the Paper

The study have four chapters , The first chapter deals with the introduction part , background
of the study , research questions , significance of the study , scope etc. The second chapter
deals with literature review of the political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy and local governance. The data which will been collect from different people in
the study areas through questioners and observation as well as form different book analysis.
The last chapter would been conclusion and recommendation.
 CHAPTER TWO

2. Literature Review
2.1 The Concept of Decentralization
Decentralization is the transfer of authority and responsibility for public function from central
government to intermediate and local government or quasi-independent government
organization and or private sector is a complex multifaceted concept (http; World Bank. The
Organization/public sector/decentralization/what, htm) however it mostly used to express
relation of authority, responsibility and also several complex issues. The term of
decentralization refers the division of political, economic and administrative power
/responsibility between the central and sub national level of government (Eshetu 1994).

Therefore decentralization refers the form and the degree of power that the local government
holds, and the relations between the federal and members of state, and the relation between
and state and local authority in a unitary state or between the federal entities and local
authority which they comprise. In short decentralization is an act in which central
government cede/ give up powers, responsibilities and other issue to actors and institution at
lower level in political administrative and territorial hierarchy.

2.2. Conceptual Framework

This research is premised on the decentralization concept. Decentralization as a policy aims
to transfer some decision making power from higher to lower level of government, typically
from the central government to sub-national governments.

Decentralization can also be defined as the transfer of puplic authority and resources
including personnel from the national to national jurisdictions. It can be seen as enabling
ashift of locus and control of decision making power and authority from the center ( central
government ) to the community with the path to their development destiny. Not only does
decentralization transfer more resources to institution further from the centre. But, also more
people have a rule in decidng how those resources are used.

Devolution in Debark has been identified as one of the typologies of decentralization. This is
basically apolitical arrangement where by power, political, administrative and fiscal , is
distrubted to territorial units. Devolution, entails creation of semi- Autonomous local level
decision making centers, which by and large are more accountable to their constitution rather
than to the central government. Devolution, unlike de-concentration entials transfer of
political and administrative decision making power and authority to sub national entites. It is
vechile for involving lower level units in to policy and decision making processes on matters
that affect them to that extent it empowers local level units and their constituents to
participate in the development of the nation state.

2.1.1. Type of Decentralization

2.1.1.1. Political Decentralization

The political decentralization focus on devolutions of decreasing making power by creating
sub national government through election multi- party system ( Taye andTegegne, 2007 ).
Political decentralization is meant to give the local people or elect representative more power
in puplic decision making. It is associated with pluralistic political and representative
government (Tsegaye, 2006). The concept implies that the selection of representative from
local electoral jurisdiction allow select officials to known the need and desire of their
constitute. It assume that decision made with local participation would make the people better
in form and become more relevant to diverse local interests than those made only by national
political authority.

2.1.1.2. Administration Decentralization

Administrative decentralization involves the transfer of decision making authority, resource
and responsibility for the delivery of selected public service of central government line
agencies. Administration decentralization is also the transfer of authority and function among
unit of the administration in the same governmental structure. the most radical form of
administrative decentralization is devolution with local government having full responsibility
as signing authority and responsibilities for carrying out tasks ( oleesen, 2007 ).

2.1.1.3. Fiscal Decentralization

Fiscal decentralization is the explanation of revenue and expenditure under the context of
sub- national government and administration unit. It is the establishment of effective and
transparent financial management at their core of any efforts to perform the public sector to
be genuinely supportive of decentralization process [Eshetu, 1994].

2.1.2. Forms of Decentralization

1. Deconcentration refers to the weakest form of decentralization decision making authority
is redistributed to lower on regional levels of the same central organization.

2 .Delegation-is a more extensive form of decentralization. Through delegation the

responsibility for decision making is transferred to semi-autonomous organization but
ultimately accountable to it.

3. Devolution _Devolution is often considered as most radical form of decentralization. When

the government devolves functions. They transfer authority for decision making finance and
management to quasi- autonomously unit of local government with cooperate status.

Devolution usually transfer responsibility for services to municipalities or distinct council

that elected their own mayors and councils raise their own revenues and have independent
authority to make investment decision. It refer to a situation where local level government is
constitute legally as a separate governance body and that power responsibility are transfer to
such unit on perma.

2.1.3. Characteristics of Decentralization

It is the process of transferring and assigning decision making authority to lower levels of an
organizational hierarchy. The span of control of top managers relatively small and there are
relatively few tears in the organization because there is more autonomy in lower ranks.

 Decision making _ democratic participation, detailed

 Organizational change _ emerging for interaction, organizational dynamics

 Execution _ evolutionary emergent, flexible to adopt to minor issues and changes

 Participation _ accountability low risk of not in wanted here behavior.

2.3. The Practice of Political Decentralization for the Development of

Grass Root Democracy
Political decentralization refers to the distribution or transferring of the power and resource of
the state for the two tier of governments such as federal government and regional (constitute
unit). In the last quarter of the 20 century, many countries in the world have engaged in the
process of decentralization by transferring responsibilities of the state to lower tier of
government. Such transferring of power is believed to bring not only political stability and
democratic government but also to improve service delivery and to attain equity. The
significance of decentralization drive to local and grass root level empowerment lies in the
fact that different level of sub national units of government are constituted in to on the bases
of citizen’s participation in the political process by way of exercising electoral rights. Local
self-government denotes the rigid Town of local authorities, which the limits of the law, to
regular group manage a sub national share of public affair under their own responsibility and
in the interest of local population Politician and development policy making agrees that
decentralization is necessary to empowerment local community to be responsive for their
development. Furthermore , decentralization is directly or indirectly linked with aspect of
good governance encoding consensual decision making ,enquiry ,representatiation
accountability and responsiveness of public institution to community concerns ( Taye ,2007 :
121 ) .

Decentralization is to increase the responsiveness of the public service delivery system by

developing resource to regionally and locally elected leaders. It provides opportunities
forvacess to reserve. The right of ensuring the behavior and actions of the state institutions of
functions. Participation in decision making process with regard to planning, resource and
expenditure management, etc. are complemented other sets of polices such as poverty
reduction, capacity building program and city administration (Tesegay, 2006:6).

2.4. Objective of Political Decentralization

Political decentralization aims to give citizens or their elected representation more power in
public decision making. It is often associated with pluralistic politics and representative
government. But it can also support democratization by giving citizen or their representative
more influence in the formulation and implementation of policies. Supporters of political
decentralization assume that decision made with greater participation would be better
informed and more relevant to diversity interest in the society than those make only by
national political authorities. The concept of political decentralization refers to know better
the need and desires of their constitutional or reforms the development of pluralistic political
parties the strength of legislative creation of local political units, and the encouragement of
public interest group[ Jonthan R, 2004 ].

2.5. Purpose and Feature of Political Decentralization

One of the purposes of the political decentralization is the transferring the power of elected
political leadership and representation from central governments to local governments and
communities. Understanding political decentralization on only in this sense limits the
meaning of political decentralization to the election of political leadership through election.
On the other hand promoting political decentralization would putting in structural
arrangements and practice that will empower and facilitate local governments and
communities to exercise both voting in choice of local leadership and representative and have
strong influence on the making implementation , mentoring and evaluation of decision that
concern their Socio economic and political well-being and to constantly demand
accountability from their local leadership[ Taye A, 2007].

The failure of the centralized state has led to a great deal of interest interacting between
decentralization and the development or democracy at the local level as well as the country
level. Many countries embraced the policy of decentralization as a means if advancing
participatory development and democratic government. In political decentralized system of
government communities can develop and sustain grass-root democracy that would raise
public awareness of the opportunities people to influence decision that matters to them
through local ballot box and also increase public appetite for more decision to be taken away
(UN, 2017). Decentralization promote greater local participation of community and civil
society organization in decision to match public service with local priorities.

2.6. Historical Background of Decentralization in Ethiopia

The present Ethiopia has little experience decentralized government system. Throughout
much of its recent history Ethiopia have be highly centralized policy leaving very little
responsibility and authority to sub-national level of administration. Ever since the beginning
modern administration system at the term of the country outlying government to the formal
authority of the central government. As a result of this there evolved a decentralized
administration and governance structure with and with full and adequate decision making
authority and controlled over resources [ Mehret, 2004].

The foundation for modern local government system in Ethiopia laid by emperor
Haliesellesie. More than half of a century ago. The imperial regime re organized provincial
administration by creating four tire local government structure that include teklay gizat,
awraja, woreda, and mikitl woreda level of administration. The system will very much
centralized because local government union have no authority over their budget and could not
undertake development on their initiatives.After the down fall of the imperial regime the
dergue government seized power in 19974. The derge government had no better record than
the imperial rule in adopting decentralization system in Ethiopia [Baharu, 2002: p134]. As he
state that the regime continued with the same tradition of highly centralized past imperial
state and him forced the traditional of the centralized state by instituting a Marxist line insist
ruling partly that imposed strong control over state and society. Therefore in the two post
Ethiopian region such as the imperial regime and the derg rule program of the
Decentralization have only paper value or not practical and also the country have large
remain decentralized partly [Baharu, 2002].

Indeed the concert retaliation of genuine decentralization to the Ethiopia when the EPRDF
government comes to power in 1995. According to tegegne and taye it commitment itself to a
broad based power structure and decentralized state.Since EPRDF the governance political
participant and service delivery provision have under gone to significant value of
decentralization (Bahru, 2002).During 2007 and 2002 Ethiopia began an ambition second
wave of decentralization furthered developing to distinct government in the four popular
regions such as Amara, Tigre, Promo and SNNPR. The process has initiated re development
of civil servants from the regime to distinct the formal empowerment of distinct government
to hire and true staff and sub- national measure of authority in planning and budgeting. The
1995 Federal Constitution of Ethiopia have formally created federal state comprising regional
and sub-national curved out on the basis of Ethiopia linguistic criteria. The federation is
comprise ethnic based regional state and two cities administration, Addis Ababa and Diredwa
including, Tigray, Amhara, afar, Oromia, Somalia, SNNPR, Benshangulgumz, gamble and
Harare national regional state. All the regional government has given some national formal
power to plan and to execute social and economic program in their localities [Tegegene, 2007
].

2.7. Political Decentralization in Ethiopia

The policy of political decentralization governance in Ethiopia is relatively new phenomenon.
Throughout most of its modern history. Ethiopia had been a highly centralized unitary state
because of the politics of nation building that has been anchored in the creation of strong
centralist state that guarded its central power.The process of political decentralization
involved in the reorganization of the Ethiopia state structure following the 1991 regime
change is characterized by the change and in the form of state structure from unitary to
federal government and from the highly centralized to decentralized state structure ( Bahru
2006 : 134 ).
The federal from of structure sharing power is inherent to it they by creating opportunities for
absorbing the contenders for power in to the political process. According to Assefa(2007)
after the down fall of Derg the Transitional Government of Ethiopia (TGE ) was established
in 1992 under the leadership of Ethiopia People Revolutionary Democratic Front ) in which a
country was divided in to fourteen self-governing ethno linguistic regional states and two
special autonomous administration areas [ Assefa, 2007].

Ethiopia was declared a federal republic after the adoption of new constitution in 1995.
According to article of the FDRE constitution regional state can establish their own
government and create other administrative levels that are found to be necessary and
appropriate. The current Ethiopia state structure has different tiers or government such as
regional, zonal, Woreda, city administration and Keble level (Bahru, 2006: 136).

Though the constitution allows for the creation of city administration with elected council,
there are different challenges that incur the Democratic self-rule and to enhance grass root
democracy. According to Meheret ( 2002: 36) the dominance of the ruling party in council
and cabinet membership reduce the political space for non-state actor to participate in
economic and political issue affecting the locality. This research tries to assess the progress in
decentralized power to the town’s community to promote local democracy and to identify gap
that will require research and policy making by concerned body.

Since EPRDF the governance political participant and service delivery provision have under
gone to significant value of decentralization (Baharu, 2002).During 2007 and 2002 Ethiopia
began an ambition second wave of decentralization furthered developing to distinct
government in four popular regions such as Amara, Tigre, Oromo and SNNPR. The process
has initiated re development of civil servants from the regime to distinct government to hire
and tire staff and sub-national measure of authority in planning and budgeting. The 1995
Federal constitution of Ethiopia have formally created federal state comprising regional and
sub-national curved out on the basis of Ethiopia linguistic criteria. The federation is comprise
ethnic based regional state and two cities administration, Addis Ababa and Diredwa
including, Tigray, Amhara, Afar, Oromia, Somalia, SNNPR. Benshangulgumz, Gamble and
Harare national regional state. All the regional government has given some national formal
power to plan and to execute social and economic program in their localities [Miheret,
2002;36].
The Amhara National Regional State (ANRS) constitution also empowered the woreda to
formulate and implement their socio-economic development. According to the constitution
the woreda administration with in its territorial area of organization all the powers enabling it
to prepare and decide on the economic development and social service plans as well as to
implement policies, laws, regulations and directives under its jurisdiction. However, this
constitutional power is constrained during practical implementation of Political
decentralization at local level.

2. 8. Local Governance and Democracy

There is crucial role of the local self-governing in the enhancing in Federal system if brings
government close to the people through both representative and participation democracy. In
addition, it allows for the development of democracy by promoting the participation of
minorities and disadvantage group. Based on locality decision more practical and sustainable
acknowledge and accommodate local diversity and historical complexities that may exist
within particularly locality. One of the rational of political decentralization is the possibility
for innovation and experimentation that affects sub national units participatory democracy in
practice allowing the community to identity more its political institution and increasing of
ownership over common resource.

2.9. Local Level (Woreda) Decentralization

Measure of decentralization devolution introduced in the immediate after of the may 1991
regime change brought about situation where by two level of government federal and
regional become operational ( Tegegne and Kasahun, 2004 ).

Decentralization devolution initiate was limited to the self-governing region in the sense of
exercise developed power and function as a stipulated in the provision of the federal
constitution and other law. This was expressed by the established of elected bodies of
governance such as regional numerical legist lecture ( council ) executive organs ( cabinet )
and judicial units in a manner that resemble the structure and organization at the Federal
level. Regional state governments are empowered to promulgate their owner constitutions
without violating the provision of the federal constitution[ Alemu Yimer, 2011].

Similar branches of government were also instituted at lower level such as woreda and
kebele. With specified powers and functions. As mentioned earlier, zones are institutive to
coordinate administrative activates, prepare development and budget plan and extend
technical assistance to the woreda under them. However zonal administrations exercised a
wide range of regulator power over woreda all of which are recognized by the constitution as
basic units of local government[Eshetu Chole, 1994].

A system of dual accountable underpins the operation of regional and woreda council where
by each accountable to its respective constructional and the council in the next upper tier.
Regional council are answerable to the electorate and federal house of representative and
enjoy a wide range of powers without prejudice to the competence and prerogative of the
federal government (Tegeghe and kassahun, 2004).

Regions are highly dependent on federal government. In the sense of receiving considerable
subsidies through intergovernmental transfers. These are used to overcome budgetary deficit
faced by the former. Hence, the federal government commands significant average in terms
of influencing matters to its linking which also is reflect in region. Woreda relation for the
same reason.it could be argued that decentralization driven of the period between 1991 and
2001/2002 was mainly limited to regional level[ Taye Assfa, 2007].
 3.CHAPTER THREE
3.1. Methodology of Study

3.1.1 Description on the Study Area

This study will conducted in the Amhara National Regional State in south Gonder Zone
particularly in the Debre Tabor Town. The town is local about 641 km away from Addis
Ababa at 10.20 and 37 43E longitudes. According the National the senses of 2007 the total
populations 60.184. Most of the residents or populations of the town are merchants and civil
servants.

3.1.2. Research Design

The study will employ both qualitative and quantitative research approaches. Because
Qualitative approach used to characterized by adherence to adverse array of orientation and
strategies for maximizing the validity of truth worthiness of study producers and result. It is
thus a type of empirical enquiry that entails purposive sampling for gathering data. It
typically involves in-depth interviews, group discussion and observation without formula
measurement. Quantitative approach used to develop and employ mathematical models,
theories and hypotheses pertaining to natural phenomena. The process of measurement is
central to quantitative research because it provides the fundamental connection between
empirical observation and mathematical expression of an attribute.

3.1.3. Data Source and Types

Both primary and secondary source of data will to gather relevant information on the study
issue. The primary data will be collected through close ended and open ended
questionnaires .And the secondary data will be collect from books , internet and newspapers .

3.1.4. Instrument of Data Collection

The instrument of data collection used through from questionnaire’s, interview and
observation.

3.1.5. Sampling Technique and Sample Size

The researcher will use sample random sampling technique. From the total no of 3 kebeles
20722 from the total number used selected 42 respondents by the following formula.
Yemeni formula (1967)

n= N/1+N( e )2

n= Sampling size

N = Total population (20722 )

e = determinant error (15.5%)

n= 20722/1+20722 ( 0.155×0.155 )

n= 20722/1+20722 (0.024025 )

n= 20722/498.8

n= 41.5

n= 42

3.1.6. Data Analysis and Presentation

The researcher will use descriptive data analysis, because descriptive analysis is attempts to
describe the distribution of political decentralization. The researcher will also use tables and
percentages. Quantitative Data collected through questionnaire will been interpreted and
analyzed in the form of table and that will been triangulated with the qualitative data would
been gained through interview and focus group discussion
 Reference

Assefa Fiseha 2007 federalism from a coma of diversity in Ethiopia / 2nd Edition /
Netherlands.

Alemu Yimer /2011/ investigation of decentralization and development in Addis Ababa

Ethiopia.

Baharu Zewude / 2006 / Ethiopia: the challenge of democracy below 2nd edition Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.

Eshetu Chloe. 1994. Finical decentralization in Ethiopia Addis Ababa printing press FDRE
1995. Constitution of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia. Federal Negarit
Gazeta, proclamation no 1/ 1995 Addis Ababa.

FDRE constitution of 1995

Jontham R, [ 2004 ] Comparative federalism and decenteralization,Analaytical review governance

and social development center [ GSDC ]
Meheret Ayenew, 2004. Rapid Assessment of Woreda Decentralization. Forum of social
studies, Addis Ababa.

Taye Assefa / 2007 / decentralization in Ethiopia printed in Addis Ababa University A.A,
Ethiopia.

Tegegne and kassahun (2004) decentralization in Ethiopia

Tsegay and Tegenu, 2006. Evaluation of operation and performance Ethnic decentralization
system in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa printing Press

Taye Tegegne G/Egziabher. 2007. Decentralization in Ethiopia Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa
printing

Olsen H. [ 2007 ] Descenteralization and local governance

 Appendix

Debre Tabor University

Facility of Social Science and Humanity
Department of Civics and Ethical Studies
Dear respondents first of all I will like to say thank your willingness to valuables information
to the following questions. The main objective of this question is to assessing the practice and
challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root democracy in
Amhara national regional state in case Debre Tabor Town.

All the information provided by you will be kept confidential given that you are not also
expected to write your name on the questionnaire.

Part one: Background of the respondents

1, Sex Male Female

2, Age 18-25 36-50 Above 60

3, Education level Certificate Diploma Degree

Master

Part. Two Close Ended Question

1. Do you think that political decentralization is practical in Debre Tabor Town to enhance
grass root democracy?

Yes No

If Yes How? Elaborate it place…………………………………………………………

If No Why?............................................................................................

2. How Official are represented in your town?

Through free and fairs election

Through political afflation

Through blood decent

3 .As you are one of residents of debark town .Do you think that you and the community are
free to develop your own culture to speak on your own mother language

Yes No

4. If your town administration is going to improve political decentralization of strategy?

Yes No

If yes how?............................................................ ...................................... ...............................

If no
why?........................................................................................................... ..........................

5. In Debre Tabor Town how decision, polices, and strategies ate making and
implementation in the local level?

A. Through participation of officials and council at town administer and local official

B. Through consultation between the official of town administration and the largest

community

C. Through the council of town administration alone

6. Do you believe that the town administration have the power to introduce takes and tariff
without the approval of the zonal administration?

Yes No
7. What is the challenge on the effort to promote decentralization in the Debre Tabor Town

administration? A, lack of skilled human power

B. Lack of skill and experts in the area of budgeting finance

C .In ability to generate sufficient reverse from local resource

D. All are possible the constraints

8 , In what extent grass root democracy empower the local elites in Debre Tabor Town?

A, By distribution power

B; By saving recognition to administer its own respective area

C, Sharing recognition to administer its own respective area

D, All are the possible answer

9, what are the main challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy in Debre Tabor Town administration?

A .Economic constraints

B. Political constraints

C. Infant social participation

D. All are the challenges

Part 3. Open ended questions

1. What type of measurement is applied to reduce the challenges of political decentralization
in Debre Tabor Town administration?

2. In there any weakness in implementing political in the town?

3. What is the practice and position of women in political representation in your town?
1.9 TIMESCHEDULE

NUMBER ACTIVITY DAYOFWORK TIMEOFWORK

1 Collected data 2week 3:00hr
2 Evaluted research proposal 1week 1:00-2:00hr
3 Reading research proposal 2week 1:30-3:30hr
4 Fo rwriting research proposal 3day 1:00-6:00hr
5 For discuss research proposal 1day 1:20-7:20hr

7 To obeserviation research 2day 2:00-5:00hr

proposal
8 Presenting of research 1day 2:20–5:20
proposal
 1.1 0BUDGETBREAKDOWN

NUMBER ITEMS MODE QUANTITY COST

1 Paper Packet 1 150
2 Pen Single 4 40
3 For typing Bi rr 0 0
4 For travel (from akuup Bi rr 4 50
toakprimaryschool)
5 Tea, coffee & food Birr 50 100
nutrition

6 Softdrinks(water) Birr 6 100

7 Printing&copy Bi rr 0 0
8 TOTAL 81 440
1.2. Statement of the Problem
Political decentralization encourages the development of local democracy. As some of the
principles of democracy are inclusiveness, transparency, accountability and .openness,
democracy and political decentralization cannot be separated. Political decentralization
particularly in Debre Tabor Town is recently structured and organized in a new manner.
However, it is not fruitful since it is challenged by many factors, such as lack of awareness
and poor on political decentralization, financial dependency of the town, and the way of
representation of town councils. Therefore we are initiated or it motivated to investigate
about the challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root democracy
in Debre Tabor Town

The previous researchers According to Tegne and page, in 1997 explained the role of
Administration Decentralization in promoting local participation debr tabor town and The
pervious rserchers According to Eshetu and page, in 2000 explained to identify the main
opportunity political administration decentralization in the study area and to investigate the
extent power in previous studies.

Further, cross country analysis shows have role and opportunities political and administration
decentralization, but those researchers did not studied on the challenges of political
decentralization for the development of grass root democracy in Debre Tabor Town. While
this paper focused on the challenge of political decentralization to fill full this gap of the
previous research. So, the researchers will be aimed to investigate the major challenges of
political decentralization in Debre Tabor Town and so to set some recommendations to
minimize such kind of problem.

1. 3. Objective of the Study

1.3.1. General Objective

The overall objective of this study is to assess the practice and challenges of political
decentralization for the development of grass root democracy in Amhara national regional
state the case of Debre Tabor Town.
1.3. 2. Specific Objectives

Based on the above general purpose the follwong are the specific objectives of
the study.
 To find out the practice of political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy in Debre Tabor Town
 To investigate the institutional and financial capability of Debre Tabor Town
administration in promoting grass root democracy.
 To assess the challenges of political decentralization in promoting grass root
democracy in the town.

1. 4. Research Question
 What does the practice of political decentralization seen in promoting grass root
democracy in Debre Tabor Town?
 What are the institutional and financial capability of Debre Tabor Town
administration in promoting grass root democracy?
 What are the challenges of political decentralization in fostering grass root
democracy in the town?

1. 5. Significance of the Study

The study will identify problems provide solution to the practice of political decentralization
and its challenge in grass root democracy. It was enable other researcher to conduct research
on political decentralization and its challenge in grass root democracy level in Debre Tabor
Town. To recommended possible solution for the betterment of future implementation of
political decentralization in Debre Tabor Town

1. 6 Scope of the Study

The study will delimited on assessing the practice of political decentralization in promoting
grass root democracy in Debre Tabor Town. The inistituonal and financial capability of
Debre Tabor Town administration in promoting grass root democracy and the challenges of
political decentralization in promoting grass root democracy in the town.

1.7. Limitation of the Study

The fact that the researcher will properly achieved did not guaranty that is makes the
researcher free from constraints the following are some of the Major limitation, lack of
written document, absence of organized data, shortage of time, financial and lack of material
and lack of available internet service those are some of the challenges that faced during the
study.

1.8. Organization of the Paper

The study have four chapters , The first chapter deals with the introduction part , background
of the study , research questions , significance of the study , scope etc. The second chapter
deals with literature review of the political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy and local governance. The data which will been collect from different people in
the study areas through questioners and observation as well as form different book analysis.
The last chapter would been conclusion and recommendation.

CHAPTER TWO

2. Literature Review
2.1 The Concept of Decentralization
Decentralization is the transfer of authority and responsibility for public function from central
government to intermediate and local government or quasi-independent government
organization and or private sector is a complex multifaceted concept (http; World Bank. The
Organization/public sector/decentralization/what, htm) however it mostly used to express
relation of authority, responsibility and also several complex issues. The term of
decentralization refers the division of political, economic and administrative power
/responsibility between the central and sub national level of government (Eshetu 1994).

Therefore decentralization refers the form and the degree of power that the local government
holds, and the relations between the federal and members of state, and the relation between
and state and local authority in a unitary state or between the federal entities and local
authority which they comprise. In short decentralization is an act in which central
government cede/ give up powers, responsibilities and other issue to actors and institution at
lower level in political administrative and territorial hierarchy.

2.2. Conceptual Framework

This research is premised on the decentralization concept. Decentralization as a policy aims
to transfer some decision making power from higher to lower level of government, typically
from the central government to sub-national governments.

Decentralization can also be defined as the transfer of puplic authority and resources
including personnel from the national to national jurisdictions. It can be seen as enabling
ashift of locus and control of decision making power and authority from the center ( central
government ) to the community with the path to their development destiny. Not only does
decentralization transfer more resources to institution further from the centre. But, also more
people have a rule in decidng how those resources are used.

Devolution in Debark has been identified as one of the typoligise of decenteralization. This is
basically apolitical arrangement where by power, political, administrative and fiscal , is
distrubted to territorial units. Devolution, entails creation of semi- Autonomus local level
decision making centers, which by and large are more accountable to their constitution rather
than to the central government. Devolution, unlike de-concentration entials transfer of
political and administrative decision making power and authority to sub national entites. It is
vechile for involving lower level units in to policy and decision making processes on matters
that affect them to that extent it empowers local level units and their constituents to
participate in the development of the nation state.
2.1.1. Type of Decentralization

2.1.1.1. Political Decentralization

The political decentralization focus on devolutions of decreasing making power by creating
sub national government through election multi- party system ( Taye andTegegne, 2007 ).
Political decentralization is meant to give the local people or elect representative more power
in puplic decision making. It is associated with pluralistic political and representative
government (Tsegaye, 2006). The concept implies that the selection of representative from
local electoral jurisdiction allow select officials to known the need and desire of their
constitute. It assume that decision made with local participation would make the people better
in form and become more relevant to diverse local interests than those made only by national
political authority.

2.1.1.2. Administration Decentralization

Administrative decentralization involves the transfer of decision making authority, resource
and responsibility for the delivery of selected public service of central government line
agencies. Administration decentralization is also the transfer of authority and function among
unit of the administration in the same governmental structure. the most radical form of
administrative decentralization is devolution with local government having full responsibility
as signing authority and responsibilities for carrying out tasks ( oleesen, 2007 ).

2.1.1.3. Fiscal Decentralization

Fiscal decentralization is the explanation of revenue and expenditure under the context of
sub- national government and administration unit. It is the establishment of effective and
transparent financial management at their core of any efforts to perform the public sector to
be genuinely supportive of decentralization process [Eshetu, 1994].

2.1.2. Forms of Decentralization

1. Deconcentration refers to the weakest form of decentralization decision making authority

is redistributed to lower on regional levels of the same central organization.

2 .Delegation-is a more extensive form of decentralization. Through delegation the

responsibility for decision making is transferred to semi-autonomous organization but
ultimately accountable to it.
3. Devolution _Devolution is often considered as most radical form of decentralization. When
the government devolves functions. They transfer authority for decision making finance and
management to quasi- autonomously unit of local government with cooperate status.

Devolution usually transfer responsibility for services to municipalities or distinct council

that elected their own mayors and councils raise their own revenues and have independent
authority to make investment decision. It refer to a situation where local level government is
constitute legally as a separate governance body and that power responsibility are transfer to
such unit on perma.

2.1.3. Characteristics of Decentralization

It is the process of transferring and assigning decision making authority to lower levels of an
organizational hierarchy. The span of control of top managers relatively small and there are
relatively few tears in the organization because there is more autonomy in lower ranks.

 Decision making _ democratic participation, detailed

 Organizational change _ emerging for interaction, organizational dynamics

 Execution _ evolutionary emergent, flexible to adopt to minor issues and changes

 Participation _ accountability low risk of not in wanted here behavior.

2.3. The Practice of Political Decentralization for the Development of

Grass Root Democracy
Political decentralization refers to the distribution or transferring of the power and resource of
the state for the two tier of governments such as federal government and regional (constitute
unit). In the last quarter of the 20 century, many countries in the world have engaged in the
process of decentralization by transferring responsibilities of the state to lower tier of
government. Such transferring of power is believed to bring not only political stability and
democratic government but also to improve service delivery and to attain equity. The
significance of decentralization drive to local and grass root level empowerment lies in the
fact that different level of sub national units of government are constituted in to on the bases
of citizen’s participation in the political process by way of exercising electoral rights. Local
self-government denotes the rigid Town of local authorities, which the limits of the law, to
regular group manage a sub national share of public affair under their own responsibility and
in the interest of local population Politician and development policy making agrees that
decentralization is necessary to empowerment local community to be responsive for their
development. Furthermore , decentralization is directly or indirectly linked with aspect of
good governance encoding consensual decision making ,enquiry ,representatiation
accountability and responsiveness of public institution to community concerns ( Taye ,2007 :
121 ) .

Decentralization is to increase the responsiveness of the public service delivery system by

developing resource to regionally and locally elected leaders. It provides opportunities
forvacess to reserve. The right of ensuring the behavior and actions of the state institutions of
functions. Participation in decision making process with regard to planning, resource and
expenditure management, etc. are complemented other sets of polices such as poverty
reduction, capacity building program and city administration (Tesegay, 2006:6).

2.4. Objective of Political Decentralization

Political decentralization aims to give citizens or their elected representation more power in
public decision making. It is often associated with pluralistic politics and representative
government. But it can also support democratization by giving citizen or their representative
more influence in the formulation and implementation of policies. Supporters of political
decentralization assume that decision made with greater participation would be better
informed and more relevant to diversity interest in the society than those make only by
national political authorities. The concept of political decentralization refers to know better
the need and desires of their constitutional or reforms the development of pluralistic political
parties the strength of legislative creation of local political units, and the encouragement of
public interest group[ Jonthan R, 2004 ].

2.5. Purpose and Feature of Political Decentralization

One of the purposes of the political decentralization is the transferring the power of elected
political leadership and representation from central governments to local governments and
communities. Understanding political decentralization on only in this sense limits the
meaning of political decentralization to the election of political leadership through election.
On the other hand promoting political decentralization would putting in structural
arrangements and practice that will empower and facilitate local governments and
communities to exercise both voting in choice of local leadership and representative and have
strong influence on the making implementation , mentoring and evaluation of decision that
concern their Socio economic and political well-being and to constantly demand
accountability from their local leadership[ Taye A, 2007].

The failure of the centralized state has led to a great deal of interest interacting between
decentralization and the development or democracy at the local level as well as the country
level. Many countries embraced the policy of decentralization as a means if advancing
participatory development and democratic government. In political decentralized system of
government communities can develop and sustain grass-root democracy that would raise
public awareness of the opportunities people to influence decision that matters to them
through local ballot box and also increase public appetite for more decision to be taken away
(UN, 2017). Decentralization promote greater local participation of community and civil
society organization in decision to match public service with local priorities.

2.6. Historical Background of Decentralization in Ethiopia

The present Ethiopia has little experience decentralized government system. Throughout
much of its recent history Ethiopia have be highly centralized policy leaving very little
responsibility and authority to sub-national level of administration. Ever since the beginning
modern administration system at the term of the country outlying government to the formal
authority of the central government. As a result of this there evolved a decentralized
administration and governance structure with and with full and adequate decision making
authority and controlled over resources [ Mehret, 2004].

The foundation for modern local government system in Ethiopia laid by emperor
Haliesellesie. More than half of a century ago. The imperial regime re organized provincial
administration by creating four tire local government structure that include teklay gizat,
awraja, woreda, and mikitl woreda level of administration. The system will very much
centralized because local government union have no authority over their budget and could not
undertake development on their initiatives.After the down fall of the imperial regime the
dergue government seized power in 19974. The derge government had no better record than
the imperial rule in adopting decentralization system in Ethiopia [Baharu, 2002: p134]. As he
state that the regime continued with the same tradition of highly centralized past imperial
state and him forced the traditional of the centralized state by instituting a Marxist line insist
ruling partly that imposed strong control over state and society. Therefore in the two post
Ethiopian region such as the imperial regime and the derg rule program of the
Decentralization have only paper value or not practical and also the country have large
remain decentralized partly [Baharu, 2002].

Indeed the concert retaliation of genuine decentralization to the Ethiopia when the EPRDF
government comes to power in 1995. According to tegegne and taye it commitment itself to a
broad based power structure and decentralized state.Since EPRDF the governance political
participant and service delivery provision have under gone to significant value of
decentralization (Bahru, 2002).During 2007 and 2002 Ethiopia began an ambition second
wave of decentralization furthered developing to distinct government in the four popular
regions such as Amara, Tigre, Promo and SNNPR. The process has initiated re development
of civil servants from the regime to distinct the formal empowerment of distinct government
to hire and true staff and sub- national measure of authority in planning and budgeting. The
1995 Federal Constitution of Ethiopia have formally created federal state comprising regional
and sub-national curved out on the basis of Ethiopia linguistic criteria. The federation is
comprise ethnic based regional state and two cities administration, Addis Ababa and Diredwa
including, Tigray, Amhara, afar, Oromia, Somalia, SNNPR, Benshangulgumz, gamble and
Harare national regional state. All the regional government has given some national formal
power to plan and to execute social and economic program in their localities [Tegegene, 2007
].

2.7. Political Decentralization in Ethiopia

The policy of political decentralization governance in Ethiopia is relatively new phenomenon.
Throughout most of its modern history. Ethiopia had been a highly centralized unitary state
because of the politics of nation building that has been anchored in the creation of strong
centralist state that guarded its central power.The process of political decentralization
involved in the reorganization of the Ethiopia state structure following the 1991 regime
change is characterized by the change and in the form of state structure from unitary to
federal government and from the highly centralized to decentralized state structure ( Bahru
2006 : 134 ).

The federal from of structure sharing power is inherent to it they by creating opportunities for
absorbing the contenders for power in to the political process. According to Assefa(2007)
after the down fall of Derg the Transitional Government of Ethiopia (TGE ) was established
in 1992 under the leadership of Ethiopia People Revolutionary Democratic Front ) in which a
country was divided in to fourteen self-governing ethno linguistic regional states and two
special autonomous administration areas [ Assefa, 2007].

Ethiopia was declared a federal republic after the adoption of new constitution in 1995.
According to article of the FDRE constitution regional state can establish their own
government and create other administrative levels that are found to be necessary and
appropriate. The current Ethiopia state structure has different tiers or government such as
regional, zonal, Woreda, city administration and Keble level (Bahru, 2006: 136).

Though the constitution allows for the creation of city administration with elected council,
there are different challenges that incur the Democratic self-rule and to enhance grass root
democracy. According to Meheret ( 2002: 36) the dominance of the ruling party in council
and cabinet membership reduce the political space for non-state actor to participate in
economic and political issue affecting the locality. This research tries to assess the progress in
decentralized power to the town’s community to promote local democracy and to identify gap
that will require research and policy making by concerned body.

Since EPRDF the governance political participant and service delivery provision have under
gone to significant value of decentralization (Baharu, 2002).During 2007 and 2002 Ethiopia
began an ambition second wave of decentralization furthered developing to distinct
government in four popular regions such as Amara, Tigre, Oromo and SNNPR. The process
has initiated re development of civil servants from the regime to distinct government to hire
and tire staff and sub-national measure of authority in planning and budgeting. The 1995
Federal constitution of Ethiopia have formally created federal state comprising regional and
sub-national curved out on the basis of Ethiopia linguistic criteria. The federation is comprise
ethnic based regional state and two cities administration, Addis Ababa and Diredwa
including, Tigray, Amhara, Afar, Oromia, Somalia, SNNPR. Benshangulgumz, Gamble and
Harare national regional state. All the regional government has given some national formal
power to plan and to execute social and economic program in their localities [Miheret,
2002;36].

The Amhara National Regional State (ANRS) constitution also empowered the woreda to
formulate and implement their socio-economic development. According to the constitution
the woreda administration with in its territorial area of organization all the powers enabling it
to prepare and decide on the economic development and social service plans as well as to
implement policies, laws, regulations and directives under its jurisdiction. However, this
constitutional power is constrained during practical implementation of Political
decentralization at local level.

2. 8. Local Governance and Democracy

There is crucial role of the local self-governing in the enhancing in Federal system if brings
government close to the people through both representative and participation democracy. In
addition, it allows for the development of democracy by promoting the participation of
minorities and disadvantage group. Based on locality decision more practical and sustainable
acknowledge and accommodate local diversity and historical complexities that may exist
within particularly locality. One of the rational of political decentralization is the possibility
for innovation and experimentation that affects sub national units participatory democracy in
practice allowing the community to identity more its political institution and increasing of
ownership over common resource.

2.9. Local Level (Woreda) Decentralization

Measure of decentralization devolution introduced in the immediate after of the may 1991
regime change brought about situation where by two level of government federal and
regional become operational ( Tegegne and Kasahun, 2004 ).

Decentralization devolution initiate was limited to the self-governing region in the sense of
exercise developed power and function as a stipulated in the provision of the federal
constitution and other law. This was expressed by the established of elected bodies of
governance such as regional numerical legist lecture ( council ) executive organs ( cabinet )
and judicial units in a manner that resemble the structure and organization at the Federal
level. Regional state governments are empowered to promulgate their owner constitutions
without violating the provision of the federal constitution[ Alemu Yimer, 2011].

Similar branches of government were also instituted at lower level such as woreda and
kebele. With specified powers and functions. As mentioned earlier, zones are institutive to
coordinate administrative activates, prepare development and budget plan and extend
technical assistance to the woreda under them. However zonal administrations exercised a
wide range of regulator power over woreda all of which are recognized by the constitution as
basic units of local government[Eshetu Chole, 1994].

A system of dual accountable underpins the operation of regional and woreda council where
by each accountable to its respective constructional and the council in the next upper tier.
Regional council are answerable to the electorate and federal house of representative and
enjoy a wide range of powers without prejudice to the competence and prerogative of the
federal government (Tegeghe and kassahun, 2004).

Regions are highly dependent on federal government. In the sense of receiving considerable
subsidies through intergovernmental transfers. These are used to overcome budgetary deficit
faced by the former. Hence, the federal government commands significant average in terms
of influencing matters to its linking which also is reflect in region. Woreda relation for the
same reason.it could be argued that decentralization driven of the period between 1991 and
2001/2002 was mainly limited to regional level[ Taye Assfa, 2007].
 3.CHAPTER THREE
3.1. Methodology of Study

3.1.1 Description on the Study Area

This study would conducted in the Amhara National Regional State in south Gonder Zone
particularly in the Debre Tabor Town. The town is local about 641 km away from Addis
Ababa at 10.20 and 37 43E longitudes. According the National the senses of 2007 the total
populations 60.184. Most of the residents or populations of the town are merchants and civil
servants.

3.1.2. Research Design

The study will employ both qualitative and quantitative research approaches. Because
Qualitative approach used to characterized by adherence to adverse array of orientation and
strategies for maximizing the validity of truth worthiness of study producers and result. It is
thus a type of empirical enquiry that entails purposive sampling for gathering data. It
typically involves in-depth interviews, group discussion and observation without formula
measurement. Quantitative approach used to develop and employ mathematical models,
theories and hypotheses pertaining to natural phenomena. The process of measurement is
central to quantitative research because it provides the fundamental connection between
empirical observation and mathematical expression of an attribute.

3.1.3. Data Source and Types

Both primary and secondary source of data will to gather relevant information on the study
issue. The primary data will be collected through close ended and open ended
questionnaires .And the secondary data will be collect from books , internet and newspapers .

3.1.4. Instrument of Data Collection

The instrument of data collection used through from questionaries’’, interview and
observation.

3.1.5. Sampling Technique and Sample Size

The researcher would use sample random sampling technique. From the total no of 3 kebeles
20722 from the total number used selected 42 respondents by the following formula.
Yemeni formula (1967)

n= N/1+N( e )2

n= Sampling size

N = Total population (20722 )

e = determinant error (15.5%)

n= 20722/1+20722 ( 0.155×0.155 )

n= 20722/1+20722 (0.024025 )

n= 20722/498.8

n= 41.5

n= 42

3.1.6. Data Analysis and Presentation

The researcher will use descriptive data analysis, because descriptive analysis is attempts to
describe the distribution of political decentralization. The researcher will also use tables and
percentages. Quantitative Data collected through questionnaire will been interpreted and
analyzed in the form of table and that will been triangulated with the qualitative data would
been gained through interview and focus group discussion

Reference

Assefa Fiseha 2007 federalism from a coma of diversity in Ethiopia / 2nd Edition /
Netherlands.

Alemu Yimer /2011/ investigation of decentralization and development in Addis Ababa

Ethiopia.
Baharu Zewude / 2006 / Ethiopia: the challenge of democracy below 2nd edition Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.

Eshetu Chloe. 1994. Finical decentralization in Ethiopia Addis Ababa printing press FDRE
1995. Constitution of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia. Federal Negarit Gazeta,
proclamation no 1/ 1995 Addis Ababa.

FDRE constitution of 1995

Jontham R, [ 2004 ] Comparative federalism and decenteralization,Analaytical review governance

and social development center [ GSDC ]
Meheret Ayenew, 2004. Rapid Assessment of Woreda Decentralization. Forum of social
studies, Addis Ababa.

Taye Assefa / 2007 / decentralization in Ethiopia printed in Addis Ababa University A.A,
Ethiopia.

Tegegne and kassahun (2004) decentralization in Ethiopia

Tsegay and Tegenu, 2006. Evaluation of operation and performance Ethnic decentralization
system in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa: Addis Ababa printing Press

Taye Tegegne G/Egziabher. 2007. Decentralization in Ethiopia Addis Ababa, Addis Ababa
printing

Olsen H. [ 2007 ] Descenteralization and local governance

 Appendix

Debre Tabor University

Facility of Social Science and Humanity
Department of Civics and Ethical Studies
Dear respondents first of all I would like to say thank your willingness to valuables
information to the following questions. The main objective of this question is to assessing the
practice and challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy in Amhara national regional state in case Debre Tabor Town.

All the information provided by you will be kept confidential given that you are not also
expected to write your name on the questionnaire.

Part one: Background of the respondents

1, Sex Male Female

2, Age 18-25 36-50 Above 60

3, Education level Certificate Diploma Degree

Master

Part. Two Close Ended Question

1. Do you think that political decentralization is practical in Debre Tabor Town to enhance
grass root democracy?

Yes No

If Yes How? Elaborate it place…………………………………………………………

If No Why?............................................................................................

2. How Official are represented in your town?

Through free and fairs election

Through political afflation

Through blood decent

3 .As you are one of residents of debark town .Do you think that you and the community are
free to develop your own culture to speak on your own mother language

Yes No

4. If your town administration is going to improve political decentralization of strategy?

Yes No

If yes how?............................................................ ...................................... ...............................

If no
why?........................................................................................................... ..........................

5. In debark town how decision, polices, and strategies ate making and implementation in the
local level?

A. Through participation of officials and council at town administer and local official

B. Through consultation between the official of town administration and the largest

community

C. Through the council of town administration alone

6. Do you believe that the town administration have the power to introduce takes and tariff
without the approval of the zonal administration?

Yes No
7. What are the challenge on the effort to promote decentralization in the Debre Tabor Town

administration? A, lack of skilled human power

B. Lack of skill and experts in the area of budgeting finance

C .In ability to generate sufficient reverse from local resource

D. All are possible the constraints

8 , In what extent grass root democracy empower the local elites in Debre Tabor Town?

A, By distribution power

B; By saving recognition to administer its own respective area

C, Sharing recognition to administer its own respective area

D, All are the possible answer

9, what are the main challenges of political decentralization for the development of grass root
democracy in Debre Tabor Town administration?

A .Economic constraints

B. Political constraints

C. Infant social participation

D. All are the challenges

Part 3. Open ended questions

1. What type of measurement is applied to reduce the challenges of political decentralization
in Debre Tabor Town administration?

2. In there any weakness in implementing political in the town?

3. What is the practice and position of women in political representation in your town?
1.9 TIMESCHEDULE

NUMBER ACTIVITY DAYOFWORK TIMEOFWORK

1 Collected data 2week 3:00hr
2 Evaluted research proposal 1week 1:00-2:00hr
3 Reading research proposal 2week 1:30-3:30hr
4 Fo rwriting research proposal 3day 1:00-6:00hr
5 For discuss research proposal 1day 1:20-7:20hr

7 To obeserviation research 2day 2:00-5:00hr

proposal
8 Presenting of research 1day 2:20–5:20
proposal
 1.1 0BUDGETBREAKDOWN

NUMBER ITEMS MODE QUANTITY COST

1 Paper Packet 1 150
2 Pen Single 4 40
3 For typing Bi rr 0 0
4 For travel (from akuup Bi rr 4 50
toakprimaryschool)
5 Tea, coffee & food Birr 50 100
nutrition

6 Softdrinks(water) Birr 6 100

7 Printing&copy Bi rr 0 0
8 TOTAL 81 440