Decentralisation and Local Administration for Development in Tanzania

Decentralisation and Local Administration for Development in TanzaniaAuthor(s): Paul CollinsSource: Africa Today, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Summer, 1974), pp. 15-25Published by: Indiana University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4185422 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 21:18

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Africa Today.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.21 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 21:18:27 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=iupress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4185422?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Decentralisation And Local Administration

For Develdpment In Tanzania

Paul Collins

Tanzania is noted for its political experimentation. The first four vears of her independence saw the creation of effective institutions of national government, symbolised by the one party democratic con- stitution and elections of 1965. During the second half of Tanzania's first decade, her leadership has been preoccupied with the search for a strategy for national social and economic development, commencing with the Arusha Declaration of 1967, committing Tanzania to a policy of 'socialism and self reliance' with an emphasis during the Second Five Year Development Plan (1969-74) on rural development. The second phase of Tanzania's development since independence has required further administrative reforms - this time at the local level -in order to improve the capacity and effectiveness of the machinery of government to carry out the new rural development effort.

This article focuses on the emergence and implementation of decentralisation policies in Tanzania, as part of a strategy of administrative reform at the local level. Against the background of the pre-Arusha Declaration system of local government and administration, outlined in Section 2, the evolution of decentralisation policies leading to the 1972 reforms is examined, in particular the establishment of the Regional Development Fund (Section 3). Section 4 outlines the substance of the 1972 decentralisation plans with their far reaching provisions for the future structure and working of government administration at subnational levels in Tanzania. In conclusion, Section 5 reviews the whole decentralisation experience to date and assesses the prospects for local administration and development.

1. Decentralisation

Decentralisation is a strategy of administrative reform aimed at increasing the decision making capacity and efficiency of local administration for development through the redistribution of powers and resources between administrative levels. In conventional terms this

Paul Collins has been lecturer in Government at Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria, since 1972. He taught at The University of Dar-es-Sala4m, Tanzania from 1967 to 1969. He is the author of a doctoral thesis on Tanzania development administration and has written on various aspects of Tanzania's development since independence.

15



implies 'delegation' or 'devolution' of decision making authority and power to local levels and the 'decentralisation' of staff and financial resources from the centre.

As a strategy, it has a number of appeals. First it is associated with abolishing the centralisation and 'red tape' which had characterised colonial bureaucracy, considered inappropriate to the needs of development administration. Second, and related to this, decentralisation of manpower and administrative authority is seen as a necessary condition for creating an informed and flexible decision making process, particularly in relation to the planned use of in- creased resources for local development projects.

Tanzania is a country where the appeals and possibilities of decentralisation have perhaps been greater than most. Ecologically, Tanzania is a large and varied grouping of regions and districts where an effective system of centralised planning would be difficult, even if there was the desire and capacity to develop one. Thus, decentralisation, under Tanzanian conditions, is a practical necessity aimed at reducing the burden on central decision makers and the impact of distortions and delays on local project planning and execution. Politically, Tanzania is in a better position to experiment than most of the other new states, since she lacks the marked ethnic and regional differences that might otherwise have posed a threat to the centre under a decentralised system of government. Indeed, Tanzania has already an impressive history of reform of her machinery of government. the most notable being the setting up of a one-party system. In some ways, the recent decentralisation complements the earlier changes. For example, the introduction of party structures into government administration has tended to compound the problem of institutional duplication (and sometimes confusion) at the local level where, until recently, three structures co-existed in parallel - the party, local government, and the field administration of central ministries. On the other hand, with the decline of local government since the early 1960's, the rise of the party has rather conveniently provided central reformers with an alternative participatory structure. Finally the emergence of the current decentralisation policies is closely related to changes in or rather emergence of Tanzania's development strategy since the 1967 Arusha Declaration; in particular the stress on rural develpment and the encouragement of popular participation in its planning and implementation. These changes have prompted a search for a suitable administrative and organisational framework for implementation.

2. Local Administration in Tanzania The growth of local government administration since 1945 has

been characterised by a proliferation of 'tiers' or 'levels' as well as the multiplication of parallel institutional structures. Thus at independence in 1961 Tanzania's 17 Provinces / Regions were headed 16



Paul Collins

by a Provincial / Regional Administration, under the Provin- cial/ Regional Commissioner and his staff, with a similar arrangement at the major sub-Provincial / Regional level - the District, headed in turn by the Area Commissioner and his staff. In parallel were the Regional and District Offices of the central technical ministries, formally related through the Regional and District Development Committees, together with the District Councils which were likewise linked through the District Development Committee. Finally, post Independence constitutional changes have created a third parallel hierarchy - the party - which has been linked to government administration at all levels through various devices.

3. Towards Decentralisation 1967-72.

rhe Regional Development Fund.

Tanzania's decentralisation policies represent a complex response to a number of conditions and events. A key antecedent to the 1972 reforms is the Regional Development Fund, set up in 1967 to provide a more limited but nevertheless significant degree of decentralised planning and implementation of rural development. As mentioned above, the emergence of decentralisation policies in the period 1967-72 is closely related to changes in Tanzania's overall development strategy, in particular the stress on an egalitarian and participatory rural development and the concomitant search for a suitable machinerv and organisation for implementation. Thus the Regional Development Fund was set up to provide more resources for this new development effort, but on a decentralised and broader basis, and in contrast to the previous highly centralised system of resource allocation which had tended to show bias towards the urban areas and to large projects. The working of the Regional Development Fund has highlighted a number of deficiencies in the local administrative machinerv, as described above, and pointed towards the need to rationalise and integrate the agencies of government variously represented at local levels, as well as to improving the local means available for project indentification and selection. Decentralisation has also taken place in parastatal organisations such as the National Development Corporation and State Trading Corporation.

The Regional (Rural) Development Fund (R.D.F.) was set up in November 1967 to provide an element of area based planning with inbuilt participation. It decentralised to subnational administrative 1. For a fuller account and analysis of the R.D.F. see P. Collins: "Policies and Local Ad- ministration for Development in Tanzania: the Case of the Rural Development Fund" Unpublished D. Phil. thesis, University of Sussex, England, 1973. Also P. Collins: "The Working of Tanzania's Rural Development Fund: A Problem in Decentralization," Communication No. 62 of Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex, July 1971, published in East African Journal of Rural Development, Vol. 5 Nos. 1 & 2, 1972.

17



levels an annual amount of development finance for allocation to small locally initiated projects of rural impact - particularly those aimed at increasing production or involving an element of self-help or collective activity. The specific machinery charged with the discretionary spending of these funds (within the broad policy framework) was the development committee system within each Region, a pyramidal structure of Village, District and Regional Development Committees. The latter serve to coordinate at Regional and District levels the various technical and administrative agencies within each governmental unit as well as to provide the means for selecting and implementing projects initiated by local organisations (such as Village Development Committees, cooperative societies and farming groups) as well as government departments themselves. The plenary Regional Development Committee, chaired by the Regional Commissioner, comprises heads of technical departments of government, party, local government and parliamentary representatives. Its working Subcommittee comprises only heads of technical departments of government. The District Development and Planning Committee, chaired by the Area Commissioner, contains similar elements, except that members of the District Council Finance Committee are also present, thus giving it a more representative character. Although the R.D.F. was clearly regarded as a major in- novation in the development process, its magnitude in the period 1967- 72 was relatively small, accounting for about three to four percent of the national development budget, perhaps reflecting understandable caution in relaxing immediately all central controls? In 1972 the experiment was taken further and made the basis of a comprehensive decentralisation involving the creation of a Regional development budget.

As mentioned above, the experience gained through the working of the RDF enabled the government and its advisors and consultants to identify and produce proposals to rectify a range of structural and manpower deficiencies in the local administrative machinery. Briefly, the RDF delegated new or additional tasks of project organisation to local administrative structures not ideally geared to planning func-

2. Over the period 1967/ 72, the total budgetary allocation to the RDF was as follows: 1967-8 10 million shillings 1968-9 20 million shillings 1969-70 20 million shillings 1970-71 20 million shillings 1971-72 30 million shillings Total 100 million shillings - (US $1 equals 7 shillings) Local ability to spend has been reasonably good. July 1970 38,658,454 shillings had been spent out of a total budgetary allocation of 50 million shillings. 47 per cent went to public works projects (roads, bridges, and wells) 35 per cent to agriculture development projects (seeds, stores, mechanization, irrigation) 14 per cent to veterinary proj ects (cattle dips and veterinary centres) and 4 pct. to cooperative or U ja maa farm ing schemes, although the proportion going to the latter is probably higher where aid has been concealed under other heads. Initially, each region was given an equal share of the R.D.F. regardless of size or level of development. Since 1971, the RDF has been allocated to the Regions on a per capita basis.

18



Paul Collins

tions. An evaluation carried out by the author suggested a number of tactors affecting performance in project organisation. The first was the capacity of local administrative agencies for project identification, selection and implementation and the absence of detailed guidelines from the centre. The position was somewhat improved in 1968 with the secondment of Regional Economic Secretaries. A second was the organisation of the machinery of government at Regional and District levels and its weak coordinative powers via a vis the agencies variously involved in the total planning process. Responsibilities for local RDF allocation were fragmented amongst a number of agencies characterised by somewhat imperfect authority and communications patterns. For example the allocation of the RDF and the management of its projects has involved several cadres of officials: generalist administrators (the chief Executive Officer of the District Council and the Regional Administrative Secretary), technicians (the Regional and District Agricultural Officer, Engineers, Planning Officers etc.) and political commissioners (the Regional and Area Commissioners). The generalist administrators, as Secretaries to the Regional and District Development Committees, had the initial responsibility of receiving and processing project applications or requests. Technicians were involved at two points in project organisation - the technical Development Committees and the implementation of projects selected and approved. Finally, the Regional and Area Commissioners, as Chairmen of the Regional and District Development Committees respectively, preside formally over project selection. Until the 1972 decentralisation they had no direct authority ovet Regional and District heads of technical departments of government.

In addition to the above mentioned fragmentation of responsibilities between agencies and actors, the multiplication of levels of government in Tanzania has further complicated the total planning process. Thus the full sequence of RDF planning and allocation could involve several agencies situated, at least, two levels. For example, a prime facie 'simple' decision to repair an existing bridge might include a number of separate political and administrative initiatives, involving several letters and meetings. Projects may in fact be initiated at several levels and by a number of groups, institutions and organisations. Likewise they may be channelled and screened through any of several hierarchies and networks where administrative, technical and administrative actors may be variously involved. Public works projects which include small infrastructure improvement, projects of community wide impact like roads, bridges and wells are usually undertaken on behalf of the District Council by the Ministry of Communications and Works and the Water Development and Irrigation Department, but initiated by client groups. These projects are screened at two possible levels - by the District Development and

19



Planning Committee (on the advice of the technical department concerned) or by the Regional Development Subcommittee - before and if they reach the Regional Development Committee for final selection. Local communities and groups, as clients and applicants, are linked to the decisional hierarchy through various political brokers such as party branch officials, District Councillors and M.P.'s as well as through administrative channels such as the Village Development Committees and District Council executive officers. Agricultural development projects, which include the provisions of seeds, mechanisation, storage facilities, irrigation, cattle dips etc., serving a more specialised clientele of producers and herders, are usually initiated within the Agriculture, Veterinary, Cooperative and Water Development and Irrigation Departments, in some cases involving contact in the field between extension staff and producers.

Local Government Reforms

Apart from the complex and cumbrous project planning process, a specific bottleneck in the first two years of the RDF's operation was the District Council. The RDF devolved additional responsibilities to the District Councils at a time when they were experiencing difficulties providing basic services and heavily dependent on technical departments of government when undertaking capital development projects. Meeting the recurrent costs of Regional Development Fund projects also placed great burdens on the District Councils. 1969 was a vear of great change in the field of local government when the central Government took over former Dist. Council responsibilities tor education, roads, health and water supplv. as well as abolishing the local rate and produce cess, replacing them with direct central government grants. In 1970, implementation also commenced of an earlier Local Government Circular on 'District Development Cor- porations.' The 1969 Local Government reforms, completed bv the 1972 decentralisation measures, bring Tanzania into line with manv other post-colonial states where a common tendency has been towards the abolition of independent local government - in the sense of democratically elected bodies with powers of taxation, spending and employment of staff - or at least its subordination to the field administration of central government in relation to which it has declined. Several factors have been involved in changes of these kinds, including the declining financial and manpower situation of local government (reinforced by the loss of staff to other elements of the public service. particularly for localisation of the central civil services) and the resultant loss of confidence at the centre in local government's abilitv to manage its affairs, as well as the vulnerability of locally elected and controlled bodies to local vested interests and political pressures. One expected benefit from changes of this kind is the rationalisation of uncoordinated government agencies at the local level. Colonial ad-

20



Paul Collins

ministration, at least in the British territories where indirect rule was the principle of organisation, did have the consequence of creating a 'dual' system at the local level - 'native authorities' and a parallel field administration. The net effect of the changes that have taken place has been to fuse the two structures.

rlie administration of Ujamaa Village development

The progress of Ujamaa Villagisation since the Arusha Declaration and the need for planned development of this programme has also prompted changes in local administration.

During the latter part of 1967 and early 1968, a large number of new Ujamaa villages proliferated around the country in response to the President's call. Unfortunately, many of these were poorly planned and both the farmers and the Government officers who were advising them had inadequate understanding of the reasoning behind the policy. Thus requests were made for tractors and rations. In some cases overzealous civil servants and politicians tried to push farmers into villages without explaining to them what they were doing.

In order to prevent 'Ujamaa' from falling into disrepute, the Government and party went to great lengths to clarify its meaning and to show how it can be implemented. In September 1968, the President stressed in a pamphlet called 'Freedom and Development' that suc- cessful Ujamaa villages could only be established by, the voluntary will of the farmers and that all decisions relating to the running of the village must be taken by the members and not imposed from outside. The government also embarked upon a number of administrative reforms in order to strengthen the machinery for assisting Ujamaa village development.

First, Presidential Circular 1 / 69 entitled 'The Development of Ujamaa Villages' effected certain reallocations of ministerial responsibilities in relation to Ujamaa village assistance. Prior to this Regional and Area Commissioners, Rural (Community) Development Officers and local government officers had sometimes experienced difficulties in securing the cooperation of technical departments of government at Regional and District levels. Whilst technical departments of government possessed almost a complete monopoly of skills and resources for project implementation, their Regional and District heads were closely tied to their departmental headquarters in Dar es Salaam. The Presidential Circular required all ministries in the Regioios and Districts to give priority assistance to Ujamaa village development.

3. For tuller details, see: P. Collins: "Local Government and Community Development in Tanzania", The Community Development Journal, vol. 7 (3) October 1972.

21



The Regions and Districts responded to the President's directive by setting up Regional and District 'teams,' comprising Regional and Area Commissioners, TANU, local government and technical ministry personnel to supervise and coordinate Ujamaa village efforts. An example is Tanga Region, an early starter in Ujamaa development. The result in many Regions and Districts was to make Ujamaa village planning and implementation a unique 'multi-agency' project.

The second major charge contained in Presidential Circular 1 / 69 was the setting up of an (Ujamaa) Planning Research and Training Unit in the Ministry of Regional Administration and Rural Develop- ment. The functions of this unit are first, to study the progress of existing Ujamaa villages and so determine what assistance government can usefully give to Ujamaa groups, which will supplement rather than substitute for their own efforts; second, (in collaboration with the University) to make technical, economic and social surveys of the majority of development areas, over a period of time, and to advise the farmers and government officials on what activities in the farming system seem to lend themselves most clearly to Ujamaa operation; third, to coordinate Ujamaa development in other ministries concerned with rural development in order to ensure that all programmes sponsored by government are planned with the maximum possible element of Ujamaa; fourth, in collaboration with the party organisation to train village leaders and regional and district staff who will work with the fledgling Ujamaa villages and communicate Government's advice to the farmers.

The Second Five Year Development Plan published in May 1969 further consolidated these measures which were aimea1 at providing more adequate coordination over, and resources for Ujamaa village development. First, the Plan states a commitment to give priority to Ujamaa production in the allocation of all government-controlled resources. A key source of Ujamaa village aid is now the Rural Development Fund.

Since the 1970 / 71 financial year, most of the Fund has been allocated by the Regional and District Development Committees to Ujamaa village development, principally for seeds, fertilisers, hoes, ploughs, wheelbarrows and so forth. Other sources of aid are the Central Government (particularly the Ministry of Agriculture), the Rural Development Bank, and the National Development Credit Agency.

The second major policy commitment of the Second Five Year Plan in relation to Ujamaa development is its announcement of a 'frontal approach': that is, the concentration of all Government and political institutions behind the principles of Ujamaa. In terms of 'villagisation' this has meant the selection of Regions, on a 'one-by- one' basis, for an all-out Government-assisted Ujamaa effort. Second, appropriate organizational changes were announced for conducting Ujamaa development on a Regional basis.

22



Paul Collins

The various Ujamaa 'teams' have been standardised as 'Regional Ujamaa Planning Teams', including the Regional TANU National Executive Committee member as Chairman, reflecting the desire for firmer centrai party control over Ujamaa development. Regional Ujamaa Development Officers have also been posted. The Ujamaa Planning Teams are intended to give advice and technical backing to as many Ujamaa villages as possible. Some twenty Planning Teams have so far been set up.

Their activity is primarily to assist groups of farmers who have decided to form villages to plan their activities and assist them in developing the organization needed for Ujamaa production. A core element of their job description is thus to assist in the drawing up of feasible and realistic development plans. These cover crops to be grown, acreages over the next five years, cultivation methods, necessary inputs, services required, recommended sources of finance etc. Accordingly, teams include, where possible, an agricultural and livestock specialist, a land planner, and economist, a water engineer, a surveyor and a cooperative officer.

The method adopted by the teams approximates to that of a 'cadre.' A group of personnel travel out to a designated area where thev inquire into the needs of the prospective 'Wajamaa.' Their find- ings are incorporated into a report, specifying cash and food crops and other requirements, which goes to the Regional Development Committee and its subcommittee for Ujamaa villages. The latter body undertakes to obtain the necessary assistance and allocates responsibilities, once it has been obtained, to implement village plans. Regional Ujamaa Planning Teams and Subcommittees are supposed to rely as much as possible on local resources and avoid making claims on the central government. Where there is no alternative, the procedure is to apply through the Ministry of Regional Administration to the Economic Committee of the Cabinet.

A number of other supporting administrative and organizational measures have been taken. First, training and political education. As an interim measure, a handbook has been prepared giving to village committees and advisory staff assistance on administrative questions, staff organization, village government. A programme is to be launched for giving selected members of Ujamaa villages basic training on ideology, village government, 'socialist' farm planning, accounting and budgeting, marketing, crop and animal husbandry, and basic agro-mechanics. Courses are to start this year and will last tor at least three months. In most cases they will be given at the existing Rural Training Centres and organised by the Ministry of Regional Administration and Rural Development in consultation with other Ministries, TANU and parastatal organizations.

23



Second, following the appointment of Regional Ujamaa Village Officers, an additional cadre of District Ujamaa Village Officers will be recruited to advise and coordinate the implementation of Ujamaa village plans at that level. Third, the necessary legal provisions within local government are being made for Ujamaa villages, particularly as regards land tenure. Finally, a major political change took place in January 1970 when the TANU Central Committee decided that TANU should take over responsibility for the U}amaa village programme.

4. Tlhe 1972 Decentralisation

Following the reports of a major study of decentralisation in Tanzania, President Nyerere announced to the TANU National Executive Committee in January 1972 a major reorganisation of the Regional administration.

Its main provisions aim to provide the conditions for an effective area based planning system. These include the reorganisation of Regional and District administration, adding 'development directors' with coordinative powers over locally based technical departments of government, the abolition of semi-autonomous District Councils and the integration of their development committees into the central administrative and party hierarchy, the creation of a regional budget, and the deconcentration of the necessary additional staff to these new or expanded local functions.

5. Conclusions

The 1972 decentralisation measures contain far-reaching provisions for Tanzania's future local administration. After five years of experimentation, Tanzania has opted for a form of decentralisation aimed at the reorganisation and strengthening of the Regional and District administration rather than the District councils, or, in conventional terms, she has opted for 'deconcentration' rather than 'devolution.' Two aspects of the 1972 reforms deserve special mention: the degree to which the changes are to promote more efficient 'development management' and the extent to which popular participation in the planning process is to be enhanced.

The provisions of the 1972 reforms for efficient 'development management' are impressive. For the first time since independence an effective system of control and coordination has been created at Regional and District levels of government, backed by a deconcentration of manpower and financial resources from the centre. For the new structures to operate optimally, however, the formal reallocation of powers and resources between levels and agencies of government will have to be supplemented by the provision of new management procedures.

24



Paul Collins

The enhancement of popular participation is a little more problematic4 With the exception of Ujamaa village development, the practical effect of decentralisation policies pursued since 1967 has been to concentrate decision making power in the hands of administrators, technicians and political commissioners at Regional and District levels. The provision of the 1972 reforms for strengthening the formal position of popularly elected vis-a-vis government elements on the District Development and Planning Committees may help- to reverse the trend towards bureaucratic dominance. A continued constraint on the scope of popular participation results from an earlier decision to abolish the Village Development Committees and replace them by Ward Development Committees, large bodies rep- resenting a wide area and thus socially and physically distant from the majority of a scattered rural population. An exception to the cen- tralising trend at the lower end of the administrative hierarchy is Ujamaa village development. The operation of Ujamaa Planning teams has radically altered the 'regular' bureaucratised patterns of access to the allocative machinery, bringing the client group into direct contact with a multifunctional cadre of technicians, planners and administrators, instead of the usual hazardous system of ap- plication through a hierarchy of development committees and loosely coordinated and variously interested agencies. On the other hand, the number of teams of this kind that can be mounted is very limited. Whilst the genuiness of Tanzania's efforts to promote popular participation is not in question, cognisance has to be taken of the manpower constraints in determining the optimal degree of decentralisation, in particular the extent to which there is available staff to maintain or create grass roots levels of administration.

4. See also: P. Collins: "Theories of Popular Participation in Development Ad- ministration: An Emprical Comment," forthcoming in Journal of Comparative Ad- ministration.

25



Date post:	20-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	paul-collins
View:	216 times
Download:	2 times

Decentralisation and Local Administration for Development in Tanzania

Documents