i
OMEJE, CHRISTOPHER C.
PG/MSC/04/35589
PG/M. Sc/09/51723
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE CHALLENGES OF
DECENTRALIZATION IN NIGERIA- A STUDY
OF ENUGU STATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SYSTEM-1999-2010
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION,
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA
Webmaster
Digitally Signed by Webmaster’s Name
DN : CN = Webmaster’s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka
OU = Innovation Centre
AUGUST, 2011
ii
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE CHALLENGES OF DECENTRALIZATION IN NIGERIA- A
STUDY
OF ENUGU STATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SYSTEM-1999-2010
BY
OMEJE, CHRISTOPHER C.
PG/MSC/04/35589
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA NSUKKA.
AUGUST, 2011
iii
TITLE PAGE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THE CHALLENGES OF
DECENTRALIZATION IN NIGERIA- A STUDY OF ENUGU STATE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM 1999-2010
iv
APPROVAL PAGE
This thesis has been approved by the Department of Public Administration
and Local Government, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
By
………………………… ……………………….
Professor Fab. O. Onah Professor Fab. O. Onah Supervisor Head, of Dept. of PALG
……………………… ………………………
Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences External Examiner
v
DEDICATION
THIS WORK IS DEDICATED TO GOD ALMIGHTY, ALL LOVERS OF
GOOD GOVERNANCE/DEMOCRACY
AND
ALSO TO MY LOVING WIFE LIZZY AND CHILDREN
vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
In a work of this nature, it is absolutely important to appreciate those who
have impacted positively in my life to actualize God’s intention in my life.
For ever I shall remain grateful to God Almighty whom I have looked up to
hence my help has always come from him (Psalm 121).
My appreciation to Professor Fab. O. Onah, a model, my supervisor who has
distinguished between personal relationship and academics.
My many thanks to the lecturers and colleagues in the Department. Le me
acknowledge in a special way His Excellency the Governor of Enugu State,
Barr. S.I. Chime since 2007 who has transformed and restoring Enugu State
to her lost Glory, he has enthroned good governance and restored autonomy
to Local Government Administration in Enugu State.
The support of contribution of my family members cannot be washed away,
from my wife Lizzy and children Mmesioma God, Solomon
Kamsiyochukwu, my parents Chief &Mrs. Mark O. Onah and every other
member of my family, I say thanks and I remain indebted to you all.
I would like to thank my leaders and friends who helped me in the cause of
my political surgeon which has progressed arithmetically from councilor,
supervisor, secretary to the council and currently the Executive Chairman
Igbo-Eze South LGA. Dr. Pat. Asadu, MHR, Hon Chuks Ugwoke
Commissioner for Information, Enugu State, Ikeje Asogwa MD Housing
Enugu State, Barr. Eugene Odo Speaker Enugu State House of Assembly,
Hon. Erochukwu Ugwu Eze Member ENHA, Dr. Leo Ugwu chairman IMT
Board, Hon. Ogbonna Idike Chairman Igbo-Etiti L.G.A, Mr. Ozioko Festus
vii
V/Cman Igbo-Eze South, Dr. Jude Omeje, Olibe James, Okwudili Omeke,
Barr. Eli Ugwu, Emeka Ezema, Ossy Ezugwu, Augustine Ugwu, Prof. Frank
Asogwa, Dan Onyeishi, Mr. Agboeze S.E., Mrs. Agbo F.N. and Engr.
Ochiaka, Simeon Omeje, Hon. Agbaji Barnabas, Hon. Agbaji Chukwuma
and host of others.
If I devote a chapter for acknowledgement, it will not be enough, therefore I
apologize to those, whose names may not have been mentioned. I remained
grateful to you all.
Finally I wish to appreciate the authors of publications consulted to produce
this work and also to my confidential secretary and assistants in my office.
viii
ABSTRACT
This research work examines the topic: local government and challenges of
decentralization in Nigeria using Enugu State Local Government System 1999-
2010 as a case. The study contends that effective decentralization is important
local governments in a federalist state like Nigeria. The data used in this study was
collected from both primary and secondary sources. The primary method/source
included the use of a research instrument (the questionnaire) and interview. Some
research questions were asked as a guide to the respondents. The questionnaire
contained twe4lve structured questions designed in both open and close ended
style. In addition, the questionnaire was validated and administered accordingly.
Secondary source of data collection on the other hand, included textbooks, journal,
government documents and internet materials. The study formulated hypotheses to
guide its data analysis using simple percentage, tables and chi-square statistical
method for data analysis. The data analysis revealed that; assessment of local
government are poor following ineffective decentralization; poor decentralization
affects service delivery and make local government and local communities not be
properly involve in development programmes; political disposition of political
leaders in the federal and state government determines the extent of
decentralization in the local government among others. It is based on these
findings that the study recommended that federal and state governments should
expand the functions of local governments by decentralizing their powers. Also
the revenue capacities of local governments should be expanded in order to
discharge their primary constitutional responsibilities and to contribute effectively
to national development.
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page … … … … … … … … … i
Approval Page/Certification … … … … … … ii
Dedication … … … … … … … … iii
Acknowledgment … … … … … … … iv
Abstract … … … … … … … … … v
Table of Contents … … … … … … … vi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION … … … 1
1.1 Background of the Study … … … … 2
1.2 Statement of the Problem … … … … 4
1.3 Objectives of the Study … … … … … 7
1.4 Significance of the Study … … … … 8
1.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study … … … 10
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHODOLOGY
2.1 Literature Review … … … … … … 11
2.2 Hypotheses … … … … … … 42
2.3 Operationalizaiton of Key Concepts … … … 42
2.4 Methodology … … … … … … 43
2.5 Theoretical Framework … … … … … 48
CHAPTER THREE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON
ENUGU STATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM
AND DECENTRALIZATION IN NIGERIA … … 52
3.1 Background Information on Local Government
System in Nigeria … … … … … … 52
x
3.2 Background Information on Decentralization in Nigeria
Local Government System … … … … 56
3.3 Background Information on Enugu State Local
Government System … … … … … 60
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS
AND FINDINGS … … … … … … … 62
4.1 Data Presentation … … … … … … 62
4.2 Findings … … … … … … … 81
4.3 Discussion of Findings … … … … … 84
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS
AND CONCLUSION … … … … … … 89
5.1 Summary … … … … … … … 89
5.2 Recommendations … … … … … … 91
5.3 Conclusion … … … … … … … 93
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
xi
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Any meaningful attempt at development by any government must
engage with citizens and communities to understand their needs, preferences
and priorities. It is based on this fact that increasing emphasis is being laid
on local government in Nigeria.
Prior to the amalgamation of Nigeria in 1914, there existed kindred’s,
villages, communities and even regions, which later integrated to form
Nigeria as a country. This implies that these small units surrendered their
powers and resources to the bigger communities now referred to as Nigeria.
At a time, Nigeria, which represents the Federal Government tends to
bite the hand that fed her by neglecting the local government which is the
foundation of other governments and concentrating efforts and powers at the
central and state levels.
However through serious agitations by meaningful citizens and
comparative studies by some elitists, the principle of decentralization, was
entrenched in the constitutions of many countries including Nigeria.
This principle was first advocated by a French philosopher, a jurist
and a writer known as Charles Montesquieu in the year 1791. The main
objective of the publications of this writer was to create awareness of the
xii
importance of decentralization of powers and functions from the centre to
different tiers of government in order to avoid tyranny and dictatorship in
government.
However, in the 1970’s and 1980, a large number of developing
countries that are politically, economically and ideological diverse,
embarked on decentralizing some development planning and management
functions despite the pressure for increasing centralization by some
dominant elites. Nigeria is one of the developing countries which
decentralizes the government powers among her three tiers of government
namely; federal, state and local government. The primary aim of this
decentralization is to facilitate the development of local communities by
bringing the presence of government at the grassroots level. However, the
practice of decentralization does not always reflect the aim of as a federalist
state. The power of local government has always been stepped upon by other
higher tier of government. Therefore, this study is an attempt to examine
local government and challenges of decentralization in Nigeria.
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
The joy of government citizen relationship consists in popular
participation, which makes the people feel the real impact of government.
xiii
This informs decentralization of different other tiers of government which
invariably makes people pay allegiance and loyalty to the government.
Unfortunately, this ideal relationship in governance does not manifest
clearly in any government that has her powers and functions centralized. In
such situation, people are not only restricted from reaching the government
but are also denied the impact of governance.
Local government in potentially important component of a single
system of government. It is the tier of the government that is very close to
local circumstance, have local knowledge of the citizens and can influence
activities more effectively and efficiently than national governments.
Local government is even more assessable to the local bodies and can
respond easily to their needs, desires and priorities than the national
government. People can easily get involved in the activities of government
and decision making because the government is physically closer to them.
In spite of these golden advantages to local government over national
government, it is discovered that local government is inefficient and
unresponsive in providing the services that people want and in the manner
people want them. This is mainly because of the way powers and functions
to local governments in Nigeria are being exercised with some measures of
xiv
control coming from the other tiers of government above the local
government.
This scenario makes local government’s attainment of full people
participatory government a mere wishful thinking the local government thus
depends on the benevolence of these upper division of the government for its
operation and survival. This depending on other powers above makes the
local government a toy in their hands as they use the local government as a
means of achieving their own goals. This situation thus denudes the local
government of the supposed viability as a government.
Nevertheless, this study intends to examine these external controls as
well as other challenges of decentralization in local government with
particular emphasis to local governments in Enugu State.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
It is argued that the key function of local government is the provision
of local public goods matched as closely as possible to local tastes and
preferences of the people in a particular area. That not withstanding, the
local government has a unique responsibility for stewardship, accountability
and enhancement of the well-being of the people in her area of jurisdiction.
xv
Needs and preferences among places and peoples vary. Some issues
will affect some communities in different ways than they will affect others
and thus there is need for distinctive responses to these diversities in the
society. More flexibility and responsiveness at a local level of government
will regulate and change behaviour and therefore address social tension and
conflicts.
However, all these responsibilities of the local government in Nigeria
seem to be a myth as the affairs of the local government are controlled
directly from the state. Both the national and state governments fail to
recognize the unique value of local government as part of a single system of
government.
Planned development requires strong national and grassroots
institutions to complement one another. Unfortunately most efforts being
made in Nigeria to strengthen the administrative capacity at the local level
for effective planned development has concentrated in making the central
government stronger than other tiers of government. This results in making
the grassroots institution weak and ineffective.
Several plans have been made in Nigeria ranging from colonial
periods till date. The first development plan for Nigeria was hatched in
London in the year 1898 through a parliamentary committee chaired by Lord
xvi
Selborne, the then Parliamentary Secretary of State for the colonies (Olowu,
1981:41). This was followed by a ten-year development plan (1946-1956)
and another plan, which ran from 1955-1960 and another, which came in
between 1958-1962. The National Development Plan of 1962-1968 was
extended to 1970 because of the Nigerian Civil War and this was the first
plan that was made under the military rule. The second plan came between
1970-1975, the third 1975-1980 the fourth 1980-1985.
These plans were backed up with very huge amount that about 134
billion Naira have been invested since 1962 to the early 1980s (Anyanwu,
1997:376). In spite of these efforts, Nigeria development plans have hardly,
justified the heavy investments made on them with the result that many of
the projects were uncompleted and abandoned mid way, development was
uneven, there was decline in industrial, construction and agricultural sectors,
with the result that food were imported and urban unemployment was on the
increase because of rural/urban migration in search of greener pasture.
These short comings of Nigeria’s development plans have been
attributed to non-involvement of the masses in plan implementation, the
inefficacy of indirect economic controls in a developing economy and lack
of necessary information on the people’s resources and the extent of the
social costs of planning that they are ready to bear (Aboyade 1968:99-100).
xvii
From the above, it is obvious that without any fear of contradiction,
one can rightly argue that the frequent failure of development programmes
in Nigeria is caused by the poor decentralization of functions or
responsibilities to the local governments or grass-root government which is
the primary target of any development. It is therefore against this
background that the researcher intends to investigate the topic: local
government and challenges of decentralization in Nigeria (a case study of
Enugu State Local Government System 1999-2010). In essence, this study
will proffer answers to dominant questions on local government and
challenges of decentralization in Nigeria.
These questions are:
i) What are the benefits of decentralization in the local government
system in Enugu State and generally in Nigeria?
ii) What are the problems encountered in the implementation of
decentralization in the Nigeria local government system and
particularly in Enugu State Local Government System?
iii) What are the necessary conditions for effective decentralization in the
Nigerian local government system?
iv) What are the measures to be adopted in improving the
decentralization in the Nigeria local government system?
xviii
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The objectives of this study are grouped into two as follows:
General objective of the study is to evaluate the extent to which
decentralization take place in the local government system in Nigeria
particularly in Enugu State Local Government System.
Specific objectives of the study are to;
i) Identify the benefits of decentralization in the local government
system in Nigeria and Enugu State in particular.
ii) Identify the problems encountered in the implementation of
decentralization in the Nigerian local government system and Enugu
State in particular.
iii) Examine the necessary conditions for effective decentralization in the
Nigerian local government.
iv) Recommend measures for improving decentralization in the Nigerian
Local Government System.
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
Theoretical Significance
xix
The importance of effective decentralization in local government
cannot be over emphasized. Local government as a matter of fact is a
product of decentralized administration and in a developing country like
Nigeria, there is a greater need to strengthen the decentralization in the local
government as a means of bringing rapid national development. This study
is therefore not only timely but of high significance.
In other words, this study will help to assess the extent of
decentralization in the Nigerian local government system. In addition, the
study will also unveil the challenges encountered in the implementation of
effective decentralization in the local government system in Nigeria.
This study will also assist in providing necessary guide for
governments at the national (Federal) and state level towards improving the
decentralization in the grass-root government in Nigeria. On the other hand,
this study will contribute immensely in improving effective local
government administration through its emphasis on involving the
government machineries and the people to development task and
programmes.
As a matter of fact, this study will contribute immensely to the
existing literature on the subject matter of this research.
Empirical Significance:
xx
This study for the researcher will be of immense contribution to
academic research with regards to local government and challenges of
decentralization in Nigeria. Also, the findings of this study will assist other
researchers who may in due course of time wish to investigate on the same
topic or similar topics.
Last but not the least, the recommendations that will be made from the
findings of this study will assist immensely the federal, state and other
practitioners in the governmental system in solving practical problems
related to poor decentralization in the local government system.
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
This study investigates the challenges of decentralization in the local
governments with a focus in Enugu State Local Government System From
(1999-2010). Therefore, in terms of scope, this study covers the Enugu State
Local Government System. Also the study will be conducted in the three
senatorial zones (districts) of Enugu State.
Nonetheless, a study of this magnitude cannot be completed
successfully without the researcher encountering some constraints or
xxi
limitations. In view of this, the major limitation was lack of financial
support. The research is a self-sponsored study and the researcher cannot
adequately fund this study to cover in detail the activities of the local
governments in Enugu State to determine the extent of decentralization.
Another limitation to the study was the difficulty encountered by the
researcher in sourcing relevant data and information for this study especially
the secondary data. The information given to the researcher by local
governments was not enough and the researcher seeks other means to
supplement it. These other means were through inter-net materials,
textbooks, journal, magazines, and through the administration of
questionnaire and interview.
xxii
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW AND METHODOLOGY
2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW
The study shall review some related relevant literature on the subject
matter of this research work. For a clearer overview of the literature, this
section is divided into sub-headings as follows:
The Concept of Decentralization
The word “decentralization” has been used in various ways by
scholars of different backgrounds, be they political scientists, government
officials and development experts. For instance, it has been defined as:
The transfer of authority on a geographic basis,
whether by deconcentration (i.e delegaton) of
authority to field units of the same department or level
of government, or by devolution of authority to local
government units or special statutory bodies (United
Nations, 1965:88-59).
The above definition implies that there are different forms of
decentralization namely: deconcentration, delegation and devolution.
According to Rondinelli (1981:137).
“decentralization is defined here as the transfer or
delegation of legal and political authority to plan,
make decisions and manage public functions from the
central government and its agencies to field
organizations of those agencies, subordinate units f
xxiii
government, semi-autonomous public corporations,
area wide, or regional development authorities;
functional authorities, autonomous local governments,
or non-governmental organization”.
Forms of Decentralization
There are man forms of decentralization. However, one of the
distinctions that have often been made is between functional and area
decentralization (Okoli, 2000 and Ezeani, 2004). The former entails the
transfer of authority to perform specific functions or activities to specialized
organizations that have branches nation-wide (Ezeani, 2004). An example of
functional decentralization is the establishment of field offices within federal
ministries dealing with health care, highway construction or agriculture. The
latter, area decentralization, has as its primary objective the transfer of
public functions to organizations within well-defined sub-district,
municipality river basin, or geographical region (Rondinelli, 1981:137).
Furthermore, distinction has also been made among three levels of
decentralization-deconentration, devolution and delegation.
xxiv
Figure 2.1: Levels Decentralization
Source: Ezeani (2004:4) Local Government Administration
Deconcentration: This is an administrative measure involving the
transfer of administrative responsibilities and decision-making discretion
from the central government or headquarters to the field and/or local
administration.
This form of decentralization grants some measure of freedom to the
field staff to plan, make routine decisions and adjust the implementation of
central directives to local conditions although within guidelines set by the
headquarters (Rondinelli, 1981:137). Deconcentration is the least extensive
form of decentralization.
Deconcentration
Devolution Delegation
Local bodied;
public Special
Statutory
Departmental field units
(Region or provinces
Government
Corporations regional
planning and area
development authorities
Division or
District
xxv
Typical examples of deconcentration in Nigeria at the federal and
state levels include the field divisions of the federal and state ministries of
education, works, agriculture, etc and the task forces on road rehabilitation
and maintenance.
Delegation: Delegation is a more extensive form of decentralization
than deconcantration. Luke, (1986:76):
It implies the transfer of decision-making and
management authority for specific functions to semi-
independent agencies such as public area enterprises,
regional planning and area development authorities,
multi-purpose and single-purpose functional
authorities and special project implementation units
(Luke, 1986:76).
It is important to mention that often the organizaiton to which the
functions are delegated may not be located within the regular government
structure. The delegation of functions to public corporation and special
authorities has been used extensively by many government in developing
countries and by international lending institution to execute development
schemes (Boodhoo, 1976:221-236). Also in Nigeria, such Federal agencies
and programmes as Directorate of Food, Road and Rural Infrastructure
(DFRRI), Operation Feed the Nation (OFN). Expanded Programme on
Immunization (EPI), the River Basin Development Authorities, the National
xxvi
Agricultural Land Development Authorities et cetera, are good example of
delegation of authority.
Devolution
Devolution is the most extreme form of decentralization. It involves
the transfer of powers and responsibilities over specific functions by the
central government to local government and/or special statutory bodies that
at least in theory, operate outside the control of the theorists have drawn a
distinction between devolution and decentralization. Sherwood (1969: 60-
87) for example, used “decentralization to describe an intra-organizaitonal
pattern of power relationships”. In contrast, devolution, according to
Sherwood (1969:60-87), means “the transfer of power of geographic units of
local government that lie outside the commend structure of the central
government”. Thus, “devolution represents the concept of separateness of
diversity of structures within the political system as a whole” (Sherwood,
1969: 60-87).
Based on the above distinction, devolution ahs certain characteristics
(Rondinelli, 1981:138). First, it demands that local government be granted
autonomy and independence and be clearly recognized as a tier of
xxvii
government over which the central government has little or no direct control.
Second, the local units must have clear and legally recognized geographical
boundaries. Third, local governments must be granted corporate status
including the power to raise sufficient revenue to perform assigned
functions. Fourth, devolution involves the need to “develop” local
governments as institutions”. Finally, devolution entails reciprocal, mutually
benefiting and coordinate relationships between central and local
governments. According to Up Hoff and Esman (1974:xii) “Local
institutions which are separated and isolated from other levels are likely to
be important developmentally”.
Despite the above distinctions, devolution is regarded as a form of
decentralization, because it involves a means of transferring political and
administrative powers, and responsibilities from the centre usually the
federal/central government to the lower units (local government). It
represents an attempt by the federal or central government to transfer powers
and responsibilities to lower units of government, which are granted
substantial but not complete autonomy.
Also although the above characteristics of devolution may be valid
from a western theoretical or legal perspective, actual requirements are less
xxviii
stringent in developing countries. As Rondinelli (1981:139) rightly point
out;
Devolution is usually seen as a form of
decentralization in which local government units are
given responsibility for some functions but in which
the central government often retains some supervisory
powers and may play a large financial role”.
It is important to mention that each form of decentralization has
different implications for institutional structure or arrangement, the degree
of power and authority to be transferred, the degree of local citizen
participation and advantages and disadvantages for various groups in the
political system (Luke, 1986:79).
Criteria for the Measurement of Decentralization
Some criteria have been developed for the measurement of
decentralization (Smith, 1979:214-222). Their weaknesses, not withstanding,
they provide some yardsticks for measuring and/or comparing levels or
degrees or decentralization between two areas in relation to the powers
delegated to them by the centre. Some of these criteria are:
i. The Tasks of Decentralized Institutions
This criterion relates to governmental functions or tasks assigned or
performed by the different levels of government in a decentralization
xxix
system. The assumption is that the more the responsibilities that are handled
by the local government, the more decentralized the system will be. Stephen
(1974) devised a “services index” to measure the state/local distributions of
services such as police, education, airports, penal institutions and highways
within the states in the united state of America. The index is passed on the
proportion of total expenditure on a public service allocated to central (state)
and local governments. Stephens (1974) classified a service as “central” if
the state spends 60-100%, as “local” if the state spends 0-39% and a “joint”
if the state accounts for 40-50%. The services index might be adaptable to
other countries although in Nigeria, such cannot be obtained in the practice.
ii. Taxation
According to this criterion, local government and systems of
decentralization can be compared on the basis of their powers of raising
revenue from their own sources rather than central subventions (Smith,
1974:216). There are two aspects of local taxation that need to be
investigated for the purpose of measuring taxation (Ezeani, 2004:8). The
first is the proportion of total state revenue, which is generated locally. This
has been used to assess decentralization within the American states where it
has been claimed that as measured by the distribution of state local revenues,
xxx
the balance of power has altered “dramatically” in favour of the states”
(Smith, 1974:216).
The second aspect of local taxation, which requires investigation, is
the extent to which it is allowed to expand faster than the rate of inflation. In
other words, a decentralized system of government exists where there is not
restriction on local tax rates, and where the tax base can expand faster than
the rate of inflation. This view is also shared by (Davey, 1971:46).
iii. Field Administration
This criterion measures the level of decentralization within field
hierarchies. Field administration as we noted earlier involves the transfer of
power and responsibilities from the headquarter of an organization to a field
office. “The exercise of authority is subject to organizational controls and its
legitimacy is based on appointment or bureaucratic recruitment. The
authority so delegated is managerial or administrative” (Smith, 1974:217)
has identified the following variables as they relate to field administration’s
contribution to the level of decentralization:
a. The more the levels in the field organization’s hierarchy the grater the
decentralization involved irrespective of the differences in the powers of
the different levels in the filed.
xxxi
b. The responsibilities assigned to field personnel also determine or impact
on the level of decentralization. Usually, filed officers have different
tasks (approval of schemes, inspectoral functions, et cetera) with
different degrees of autonomy.
c. The type of interdepartment co-ordination used will affect
decentralization. A prefectoral system is more likely to reduce
decentralization since it adds to the degree of central control over both
the field agents of functional departments and any devolved institution.
d. The rate at which field offices have to reer matters to central
headquarters for decision is also an indication of how far a field service
is centralized or decentralized. The higher the frequency, the less
decentralized the field service.
e. The level of decentralization to field officers is affected by the methods
of control. Advance review involves less decentralization than reporting,
inspection, a third method, and fall somewhere between the two.
iv. Delegation
The amount of delegation to local political authorities is also another
important criterion for measuring decentrlaizaiton. The amount of delegation
is measured by reference to three factors. The first is the extent of
jurisdiction granted by the center. According to Smith (1979:218) “local
xxxii
authorities with a “general competence” will be taken as more decentralized
than one subject to the rule of ultra vires”. The second factor is the form of
central direction. According to Ezeani, (2004) this can come either in form
of control or by influence. The more the number of local decisions which are
centrally influenced (subject to resistance) rather than controlled (backed by
sanction), the greater the decentralization (Smith, 1979:218). The third, and
last factor is the factors that determine the of form of initiation or veto from
the central.
v. Creating Area Government
The critical issue here is determining the source of the area
government’s authority. This is also in form of the legislature or the
executive transferring responsibilities to the area government. A political
system where local authorities have statutory powers and duties assigned to
them by the legislature or the constitution is more decentralized than one
where statutory powers and duties are delegated by the executive.
vi. Expenditure
This criterion measures decentralization by ascertaining the level of
local expenditure as a proportion of total public spending. The higher the
proportion of total public expenditure incurred by the local government the
xxxiii
greater the decentralization. This criterion has been used by researchers in
the United States of America to show how the level of state participation has
increased in virtually all areas of local public policy (Gurmm and Murphy,
Quoted in Smith 1979:128-129).
vii. Financial Dependence
Decentralization is also measured by determining the rate of local
government revenue in relation to the total government revenue. The
assumption here is that the higher the financial dependence of the local
government on the federal government, the less the decentralization.
Financial dependence, therefore, reduces local government autonomy by
increasing central or federal control. On the contrary when parts of an
organization have their own sources of revenue, their own credit and expand
their resources as they see fit, the organization is called decentralized”
(Kaufman, 1963:13).
However, (Ezeani, 2004:11) believe that “there should be less
emphasis on the direct relationship between the proportion of local revenue
emanating from the federal grants and level of decentralization. Financial
dependence on the federal grants and level of decentralization. Financial
dependence on the federal government does not necessarily lead to federal
control or loss of local government autonomy. What is important is whether
xxxiv
the federal grant has certain conditionalities or strings attached to it. For
example, (Smith, 1997:221) gave that “grants may be spending body to
distribute the resources according to its own sense of priorities”. In addition,
he expressed that a grant may be accompanied by a ceiling for all local
expenditure which if exceeded attracts certain penalty.
Personnel
The extent to which the federal or centre controls the selection and
deployment of local personnel is another measure of decentralization. The
assumption here is that the more the federal control the less decentralized the
organization. Also decentralization has been measured by the extent to
which “significant” actors in “significant” local decisions and local residents
(Bonjean et al, 1971).
Arguments in Favour of Decentralization
There are a number of advantages associated with the transfer of
greater powers and responsibilities from the central government to lower
units of administration or organizations for development planning and
management in developing countries.
Firs (Musa, 1973; Ezeani, 2004; Lele 1975; Rondinelli, 1981; and
Adamolekun, 2002) decentralization has become a strategy of over-coming
xxxv
some of the deficiencies of centralized national planning. The transfer of
greater responsibilities to field staff, local government and/or local
administration and other grass-root organizations, allows them freedom to
tailor development plans and programmes to the needs of heterogeneous
regions and groups within the country.
Secondly, decentralization of responsibilities to government officials
at the local levels provides them the opportunities to have closer contact
with the local population, enhances their knowledge of and sensitivity to
local problems and needs.
Decentralization also promotes equity in the allocation of government
resources and investment by allowing greater representation for various
groups political, religious, ethnic in development decision-making. A good
example is Sudan, where decentralization was used to satisfy dissident
political and religious groups demand for administrative autonomy (Musa,
1973:1-6).
Another advantage of decentralization is that it could lead to capacity
building among officials of local government and other local institution, and
thus enhance their capacities to assume functions that are not usually
performed well by the central ministries. Such functions include the
xxxvi
maintenance of roads and infrastructure and investment in areas remote from
the national capital (Rondinelli, 1981:135).
Decentralization enhances the efficiency of central or federal
government. This is because; it relieves top management officials of routine
tasks that could be more effectively performed by field staff or local
officials. The top management staff would, therefore, have more effectively
the implementation of development policies and projects (Rondinelli,
1981:135-135).
Decentralization is equally capable of enhancing political stability and
national unity by providing opportunities for diverse groups in different
parts of the country to participate more directly in development decision-
making, thereby increasing their “stake” and commitment to the unity of the
country.
Again by transferring greater responsibilities to field staff, local
officials and organizations, decentralization would facilitate greater
“penetration” of national government policies and programmes to remote
and or rural areas whose inhabitants are sometimes insensitive and ignorant
of national government plans, and where support for these plans are weak.
Another merit of decentralization is that by granting some measure of
autonomy and independence to local unit officials, it can promote flexibility,
xxxvii
innovation and creative administration. This is because the local officials
would now have the opportunity or freedom to experiment with new
programmes and projects which if successful can be replicated in other areas
of the country (Lele, 1975).
Furthermore, decentralization is capable of providing “a structure
through which activities of various central government ministries and
agencies involved in development could be co-ordinated more effectively
with each other and with those of local leaders and non-government
organizations within various regions” (Rondinelli, 1981:136).
Institutionalization of citizens participation in development planning
and management can be realized through a decentralized administrative
structure, which can facilitate the exchange of information about local needs
and channel political demands from the local community to national
ministries (Rondinelli, 1981:136); Cohen and Up Hoff 1980: 233-235).
Decentralization also would lead to greater mobilization of local
resources for development. This is because;
Citizens within self-governing sub-national
governments are likely to be more willing to
contribute financially in support of development
activities that are identified and implemented at the
local level than they would contribute to central
government (Adamolekun, 2002:50).
xxxviii
Finally, decentralization, according to the public choice school,
promotes competition and choice. By promoting competition among
decentralized government units, decentralization will lead both to
improvement in the quality of goods and services they provide and reduction
of costs.
Arguments against Decentralization
Inspite of the advantages of decentralization discussed above, the
following arguments which Prod’ homme (1995) summarized as the
“dangers of decentralization”. Have often been put forward. Firstly,
Pertaining to the argument of the public choice school, crities contend that
competition among decentralized government units does not always result to
reduction in the cost of providing goods and services. In addition, they argue
that “the idea that citizens have a choice between jurisdictions is only
practicable in certain socio-cultural and political contexts. Adamolekun
(2002:51) stated that the United States of America proved the point in
practice of her decentralization programme.
On the issue of resource mobilization, allocation and utilization,
critics of decentralization argue that the central or federal government in
developing countries is better equipped to mobilize national resources and
deliver results than the local levels due to the high caliber of manpower in its
xxxix
employ. It is also in a better position to tackle inter-jurisdictional
inequalities.
Finally, crities of decentralization argur “that weak states cannot
afford to decentralize, especially in the sense of devolution, because of the
danger of further weakening the state (Adamolekun, 2002:51). This
argument is weak because autonomy for distinct communities or ethnic
groups could actually contribute to the stability of the national state.
Adamolekun has stressed that a good example is Switzerland, which has
remained stable despite its autonomous ethnic/linguistic cantons.
Problems in the Practical Implementation of Decentralization
The implementation of decentralization policies in the developing
countries has recorded limited success. Commenting about the
implementation policies in Tanzania, Picard (1980:239-257) notes that while
decentralization has brought about a modicum of deconcentration of power
to the regions and districts, the administrative structure has not been able to
establish the mechanisms that will ensure increased participation at the
district and sub district level”. The following factors constrain the effective
implementation of decentralization policies.
xl
The first is low commitment on the part of the dominant political
leaders. This was the situation in Nigeria, Tanzania, Sudan and Kenya
(Rondinelli, 1981:140).
The second and very important constraint to decentralization has been
the continuing resistance of central government bureaucrats in both the
national ministries and local administrative units. Writing on the situation in
East Africa, Rondinelli (1981:140) notes:
The resistance is attributable not only to the unwillingness of central
ministries to transfer those functions that provided their base of financial
resources and political influence, but also to the deep distrust that
technicians and professionals within central ministries have of local
administrators and tribal, religious and community leaders”.
The third is resistance from traditional elites and some local leaders
who felt that decentralization will break up or weaken their traditional bases
of political influence.
The forth is the centralist attitude of many government officials-both
at the national level and in local communities, which make them oppose
participation of rural people in development activities.
The fifth constraint to effective decentralization in developing
countries is the weak administrative capacity, especially, at lower level of
xli
government. In most developing countries, there is a dearth of high caliber
technical and managerial skills, especially, at the lower levels of government
needed to carry out development activities.
Sixth, decentralization policies in developing countries have been
undermined by the failure of the central or federal government to provide the
lower levels of government with adequate financial resources or adequate
legal powers to collect and allocate revenues within local jurisdiction. This
has been a major problem facing local governments in Nigeria (Ezeani,
2004). In addition, he stressed that the lack of adequate physical and
communication infrastructure in rural areas also undermines decentralization
in developing countries. It makes coordination among decentralized
administrative units almost impossible and constrains effective interaction
among them and with central government ministries.
Conditions for Effective Decentralization
The success of decentralization policies depends on the existence of,
or the ability to create the following conditions (Rondinelli, 1981:142).
i. Favourable Political and Administrative Conditions: These include
strong political commitment and support from national leaders,
government officials and line agencies to decentralization; strong
xlii
administrative and technical capacity both within central government
ministries and agencies and their field agencies and lower levels of
government; and effective channels of political participation and
representation for rural dwellers that reinforce and support
decentralization.
ii. Existence of Favourable Organizational Factors: These include the
allocation of planning and administrative responsibilities among
levels of government based on decision-making capabilities, existing
or potential resources and performance capabilities of each level; clear
and unambiguous decentralization laws, regulations and directives
that outline the relationship among different levels of government and
administration; clear division of functions among organizational units
and well as the roles and duties of officials; existence of effective
communication linkages among local units of administration or
government and between them and higher levels necessary for
reciprocal interaction, exchange of information and ideas, cooperative
activity and conflict resolution.
iii. Favourable Behavioural and Psychological Conditions: These
consist of favourable attitudinal and behavioural disposition towards
xliii
decentralization by both central and local officials as manifest in their
willingness to share authority with rural people and accept their
participation in planning and implementation of development
activities; a positive change of attitude towards decentralization by
local elites and traditional leaders; and existence of trust and respect
between citizens and government officials and mutual recognition that
each is capable of participating in the planning and implementation of
development activities.
iv. Resource Conditions: These include the provision of adequate funds
for lower level of government or administration necessary for
effective performance; granting of adequate authority to lower level
administration or government to raise or obtain adequate financial
resources to perform assigned functions; and existence of adequate
physical infrastructure, and transportation and communication
linkages, within local administrative or governmental units necessary
for easy mobilization of resources and delivery of public services.
It is important to mention that there does not exist a universally
prescribed precise combination of conditions necessary for making
decentralization feasible. The conditions vary from one country to another
xliv
and must be assessed based on the peculiarities of each country at the time
decentralization policies were formulated.
Challenges on the Implementation of Decentralization in Nigeria: An
Overview
Rondinnelli and Ingle (1983:52) outlined four main factor affecting
decentralization policies in developing country to include:
1. The degree to which central political leaders and bureaucracies support
decentralization and the organizations to which responsibilities are
transferred.
2. The degree to which the dominant behaviour attitudes and culture are
conducive to decentralized decision-making and administration.
3. The Degree to which adequate financial, human and physical resource
are made available to the organizations to which responsibilities are
transferred.
4. The degree to which policies and programmes are appropriately
designed and organized to promote decentralized decision-making and
management.
In sum, Rondinelli and Ingle are saying that it is obvious that any
policy programme which does not have the consent of political leaders and
xlv
the democracy is bound to be frustrated. Either by starving the programme
with adequate material and human resource or futile design.
According to Olowu (1988:vi) genuine local government have now a
potential for socio-economic development in at least three important respects
as opposed to the earlier conception and belief that local government were
appropriate only for maintenance of law and order and other control
functions.
He continued to list these decentralized functions to include:
1. Helping to indicate in people, positive citizenship attitudes such as
consideration, self-control, community responsibility and identity.
2. Providing basic community service which both improves the quality of
the people lives and enable the community to generate the community
activities and
3. Helping people especially in the rural areas, to organize themselves for
the mobilization and effective management of community programmes
respectively.
By implication Oluwo is saying that local governments have been
liberated from the initial marginalization by the higher government.
He however turned round again to say that though many African
countries have embarked on decentralization programmes in view of the
xlvi
above realizations the over-all effect of such efforts have often meant an
attempt to bring local people under the control of central government
bureaucracy rather than to stimulate them into becoming self-government
problem solving community groups Olowu (1988: v-vi).
No wonder then why Odo concluded that the local government
depends on the benevolence of these upper divisions of the government for
its operation and survival. A situation which makes the local government a
toy in the hands of the state and federal government.
Olisakwe argues that the following factors militate against true
decentralization in Nigeria.
Fragile unity-problem of ethnicity
Military rule for too long
National Development plans
Democracy
Creation of more states and local governments
Central governments in Nigeria exert energy in trying to suppress
pockets of ethnical motivated conflicts and civil disobedience arising from
unwillingness of the central authority to grant true decentralization as
required by a federation constitution.
xlvii
The above factor not withstanding, Nigeria has been ruled for about
thirty years out of forty-nine years of independence by the military men. The
military rule as we know is characterized by orders emanating from the top
hierarchy of commands and the maintenance of es spirit de corps and
discipline as opposed to the give-and-take, political compromises, active
competition, co-operation etc that is in existence in civil political rule and
Federalist government. It is thus hard to expect true decentralization to be
structured, nurtured and cultured in a nation-state that is run as a de factor
unitary rule rather than federal system of government.
Nigerians so much believe in formulation and implementation of
national development plans and this hinders decentralization as these
National plans are implemented from the central to the neglect or minimal
involvement of the local government that seems to be the main beneficiary
of the development plans.
The idea behind the creation of more states and local government
areas has been to decentralize powers and disperse resources for effective
development. In Nigeria, the original objective of decentralization of powers
and functions of government is being neglected since such newly created
states and local government areas are so bereft of resources that they are no
longer viable. It is argued in certain circles that the new creations are
xlviii
intended for opposite objective of decentralization in other words, the
creations are meant to wit and weaken the periphery in such a way that they
would be unable to challenge effectively the might of the central government
and those who control it or be able to unite together to fight for their rights
under a federal set-up.
The political framework of democracy which permits incessant
change in government setting, affects decentralization. If successive
government comes up with different political philosophies, decentralization
process may be destabilized. The new governments may have contradictory
law which never reconciles with the former but confuses the underlying
basis for decentralization.
The United Nations Population UNFPA (2004) found in her study of
seven countries titled UPFPA and Government Decentralization, that there
are problems associated with managing the cultural changes to a
decentralized system. They however, came up with the following challenges
of decentralization:
1. Central governments are often reluctant to share power or relinquish
power and authority and sub-national governments tend to resent the fact
that they are made possible for service delivery without the necessary
resources.
xlix
2. Decentralization in most developing countries like Nigeria is
characterized by insufficient staff, inadequate training and poor
management as well as insufficient management system and procedures.
The decentralized jurisdictions are often totally dependent on the fiscal
allocation received from the central government who may come up with
a frustrative allocation formula that will make the local government have
insufficient funds to pay salaries and make few purchases.
3. Decentralization can exacerbate the shortages of funding at lower levels
by adding on costly new responsibilities and requirements without the
commensurate funding required. UNFPA noted that instability in the
political framework destabilizes decentralization process. This is a
problem particularly where the successive governments enter with
different political ideologies from the defunct government.
The study also revealed that in some developing countries,
decentralization process has met with resistance from the labour unions and
even from some state government which fear having to assume many new
responsibilities without adequate funding.
The purpose of decentralization is seen as bringing services closer to
their needs of people but at times one can find out that roles and
l
responsibilities cannot be deconcentrated because of lack of skills at the
lower levels to successfully carry out the programme.
Oyeyipo in his write up titled Local Government Institutions:
Problems and Prospects attributes the collapse of the local government
system to the stultification of the growth of governmental institutions
designed to facilitate governing by both the operators or and the immediate
higher level of government.
He continued to say that guaranteeing the existence of a level of
government and stipulating the functions of the organs of the government
guarantees effective performances of such functions of the main organs of
that government, and guaranteeing funding, do not necessarily guarantee
effective performances of such functions. What facilitates effective
performances are the institutions built to service that level of government.
Such institutions built to service the local government system include:
1. The State Joint Local Government Account
2. The Local Government Service Commission
3. The Emirate/Traditional Council
Oyeyipo, however, pointed out that the problems of these institutions
established to service local government system lie in not giving them chance
to grow, to make their own mistakes and correct them and to become
li
respectable, responsible and trusted institutions of governance at the grass
roots level.
Oyeyipo in other words, is saying that the governments have a nice
planning process of establishing institutions of Funding, Staffing and
Traditional Authority to service the local government system but the
problem is that their authority to function effectively is being usurped by
higher tiers of government the Federal state governments.
He enumerated the functions that should, be devolved to local
governments to include:
The control of markets and motor parts
Sanitary inspections, refuse and night soil disposition
Control of slaughter houses and slaughter slabs
Public conveniences
Burial grounds and homes for the destitute or inform
Registration of births, deaths and marriages
Provision of community and local recreation centres parks, gardens
and public open spaces.
Establishment of fuel plantations.
Licensing, supervision and regulation of bake houses and laundries.
lii
Licensing and regulation of bicycles, hand carts and other types of
vehicles except those mechanically propelled and canoes.
Control of keeping animals
Control of hoardings, advertisement and use of loud speakers in or
near public places or drumming.
Naming of roads and streets and numbering of plots/buildings.
Collection and control of revenues from forestry outside the “forest
Estate” or gazetted Forest Reserve.
Collection of vehicle parking charges
Collection of property and other rates, community tax and other
designated revenue sources.
The above functions are referred to as exclusive/mandatory functions
while concurrent ones include primary education, agriculture and national
resources and health services.
Nwosu, in his examination of the functional role of the Local
Governments observes that even though the 1979 Constitution prepared a
fertile ground for Local Governments in terms of its recognition as a third
tier of government, and the assured financial resources from both within and
outside local government, local governments have failed in their functional
liii
role (Nwosu, 1988:78). This is traceable to the abuse of constitutional
provision by the State and Federal Governments especially the former.
The main objective of recognizing the local government as the third
tier of government is to make appropriate services responsive to local wishes
and initiatives by devolving or delegating them to local representative
bodies.
Nwosu, however, claims that there is no way the Federal and State
Governments can reach the millions of people in the rural areas without
going through Local Governments. Unfortunately, Local Governments were
either neglected or bypassed in some development activities. This is evident
in their uncoordinated but well-intentioned programme at local level. He
however enumerated areas of neglect by both State, and Federal Government
to include, Primary education, agriculture, health care delivery, rural water
supply and staff reliance.
Looking at social service delivery in Nigeria, Laleye argues that the
local authorities have been making negligible contribution in this regard. He
advanced three reasons for this observation.
First, there is the undeniable under-development of the concepts of
social service and consequently a serous weakness of social policy at the
levels of government in general and local government in particular.
liv
Second is the problem of imbalance in the allocation of social service
function among levels of government with local governments being the
worst for it, especially since this allocation is not backed up with adequate
financial devolution.
Third, the social service function of local government is largely
usurped by functional organizations or interest groups at the grass root level
thereby diminishing the credibility of local governments as real
governments. He concludes by drawing attention to the need for redefinition
of functional areas between governments. He continued by saying that apart
from this institutional arrangements, efforts should be made to get people
involved in the political process and service delivery.
Longe (1988:129) in his discussion on inter-governmental fiscal
relationship and local government finance in Nigeria observes that the lower
levels of governments in Nigeria, that is, the states and local government
have often been in finance distress. In particular, the local governments have
been experiencing poor finances and this is partly responsible for their
difficulties in executing their functional obligations in terms of provision of
basic amenities to their respective communities. He continued by saying that
the major part of revenues accruing to the local governments has often been
used in meeting recurrent expenditure with little or nothing left for
lv
development purpose. This results to rural urban migration, low agricultural
productivity and poor agricultural output high infant-mortality rate,
inadequate sanitation, diseases and high level of illiteracy as people in rural
areas lack basic amenities like water to mention but few.
2.2 HYPOTHESES
The following hypotheses are stated to guide this study:
H1: Decentralization improves efficiency and effectiveness of the local
governments and rural communities.
H2: Poor involvement of local government and rural communities in
development programmers affect the implementation of decentralization in
Enugu State Local Government System.
H3: Policy choices, strategies and political processes pursued by the
government, determine the success or failure of decentralization in the local
government.
2.3 OPERATIONALIZATION OF KEY CONCEPTS
Concepts in the social sciences do not easily lend them selves to one
definition. Therefore, the clarification of the following key concepts captures
the operationalization or technical usage in the research work. These
lvi
concepts will facilitate the understanding of the concept of this study. These
concepts are:
Administration: The term administration covers almost every sphere
of activity involving cooperation action. Different meanings have thus
been attributed to the concept of administration. Administration here
describes that part of the government that manages public affairs during
the period of a chief executive. It is also a cooperative action with a
high degree of rationality.
Decentralization: Decentralization is a term used to refer to a process
of transferring administrative responsibilities and/or political power or
functions from the central government and its agencies to sub national
structures or local government.
Government: Government connotes a group of people elected or
selected to run the affair the state. In other words, government is that
agent of the state that makes the states policies and complements them.
Local Government: Local Government refers to the government at the
grass root level. Local government also means the interests of the rural
and urban communities sunder it locality.
2.4 METHODOLOGY
lvii
Types of Study
This research is a survey study designed to investigate the topic; local
government and challenges of decentralization in Nigeria. As a fact finding
study, this study will descriptively assess the decentralization in Nigeria
Local Government and will be narrowed down to a case study of Enugu
State Local Government System.
Sources of Data Collection
The researcher made use of two types of data. These are Primary and
Secondary data.
Primary Sources of Data Collection: These include all sources adopted by
the researcher to gather relevant information through personal effort. These
include interview, personal observation and the use of questionnaire
administration.
Secondary Sources of Data Collection: The sources adopted here involved
drawing information from documents such as textbooks, journals, annual
reports files, government documents or publications and other unpublished
research materials by students.
Data Gathering Instrument
lviii
Questionnaire is the main data-gathering instrument of this study.
Questionnaires are sets of questions and answers which can be mailed to
respondents by post or carried by field worker or enumerator and researchers
for their responses. Odo (1992:41) defines questionnaire as a series of
written questions or a repository and/or a devise which the respondents
written opinions are sought that test the research questions or answers to
research questions and research hypotheses.
The close ended and open ended question were adopted to obtain
information from the respondents. The questions posed were related to the
topic under the study. Options were provided to the respondents to select
from in the close-ended questions while the Likert type questions were also
including to enable the respondents to state areas of desirability and
undesirability in the open ended part of the questionnaire.
Reliability and Validity of Instrument
To adequately ensure empirical reliability and validity of instrument,
the researcher took one of the ideal questionnaire copies to her project
supervisor for approval and correction of areas of deficiencies in the
questions and grammatical accuracies before distribution. Also the
instrument reliability was subjected to test-retest technique. According to
Odo (1992:51) test-retest is a technique of establishing the reliability of an
lix
instrument as a process whereby the researcher administers the constructed
questionnaire to the same reliability sample group more than once with a
view to discovering how consistent each element of the group is in the
scoring of the instrument at those different times.
Population of the Study
The term population is defined by Odo (1992:46) as “the entire
number of people objects events and things that all have one or more
characteristics of interest to a study”. The population of this study is drawn
from the 17 local government councils that make up Enugu state. These
local government councils are: Anuri, Awgu, Enugu East, Enugu North,
Enugu South, Ezeagu, Igbo Etiti, Igbo-Eze North, Igbo Eze south, Isiuzo,
Nkanu East, Nkanu West, Nsjukka, Oji River, Udenu, Udi and Uzo-Uwani.
Sample of Study
Samples are normally used in studies that involve large population.
The reasons for using sample include; the desire to adequately manipulate
the enormous population in order to avoid errors due to the calculation of
large numbers and the desire to reduce the cost of producing the
questionnaires that will cover the entire population.
lx
Odo (1992:26) defines a research sample “as a process of selecting a
proportion of the population considered adequate to represent all existing
characteristic within the target population for the purpose of generalizing
taget population and to any other population having similar characteristics
with the target population”.
The researcher considered the largeness of population and decided to
draw the sample only nine local government area, three local governments
each from the three senatorial districts of the state. Therefore, the sample of
the population is shown below:
Sample of the Population
Senatorial District Areas No. of Persons
Enugu West Awgu Local Government
Anuri Local Government
Orji River Local Government
30
30
30
Enugu East
Nkanu West Local Government
Nkanu East Local Government
Enugu East Local Government
30
30
30
lxi
Enugu North Nsukka Local Government
Udenu Local Government
Igbo-Eze South Local Government
30
30
30
Total 270
Source: Field Survey, 2009
Sampling Procedure
The sample technique or procedure used for the study is the Simple
Random Sampling (SRS) in selecting the respondents that would answer the
questionnaires. According to Odo (1992:51) simple random sampling
assumes all the elements in the population to be suited to identified, having
all the characteristics, symmetrical, same and similar”. In applying simple
random sampling, the researcher randomly selected the respondents to give
equal opportunity to the nine (9) local governments sampled out for the
study.
Method of Data Analysis
In analyzing the raw collected data, the researcher will be guided by
the objectives of the study, research hypotheses and research questions, and
lxii
items on the questionnaire will be spread out in order to capture the
qualitative and quantitative responses expected from the respondents.
The study adopts the use of tables and chi-square statistical methods
for analysis of data. However, in presenting the tabulated data, the use of
simple percentage will be adopted.
2.5 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
In the choice of a suitable theory for this study, efforts have been
made to included on a theory that has holistic view on the subject matter and
such that can explain the present scenario of decentralization in the local
government system in Nigeria.
The study therefore inclined to the structural functional theory, which
came into existence from the view point of the scholars of systems theory.
Structural functional theory has been supported by Gabriel. A. Almond,
Amitai Etzioni, Peter M. Blau, Talcolt Persons, David Easton, among others
who have scholarly studied the political systems or administrative units from
a systemic view/approach.
The central theme of this theory according to Okoli (2004:16) is in
“the functional interrelatedness of parts”. The theory emphasizes on
functional effectiveness and survival of political institutions or systems. As
lxiii
we are aware, a political system consists of several structures, which are
patterned by action and resultant institutions. These institutions are pattern
of action s as objective consequences for the system which implies that
certain structures perform certain functions and failure of these structures to
perform their assigned functions results to dysfunction which means
destroying the existence and growth of the system. The proponents of this
theory draw attention to certain conditions of survival or certain functions
which are essential for the maintenance and reservation of basic
characteristics of political system.
In applying this functions, Gabriel A. Almond divided them into four
input and three output functions. The four input functions are political
socialization and recruitment, interest articulation, interest adjudication, and
political communication. The three output functions include rule making,
rule application and rule adjudication. The input functions, which are
performed by non-governmental subsystems society and the general
environment, are regarded as highly significant. While the output functions
are performed by the traditional government agencies like the legislative, the
executive, the judiciary and the bureaucracy.
Application of the Theory to the Study
lxiv
The structural functionalism theory has much significant justifications
to the problem under investigation. Revisiting the theoretical tenets of the
structural functionalism theory, which centres on functional interrelationship
of parts as a means of enhancing functional effectiveness and survival, one
therefore cannot comprehend the decentralization in the Nigerian local
government outside a theory like the structural functional theory. In
application of this theory to the subject matter at hand, we see that local
government is a product of decentralized administration and thus a specific
structure with its specific functions, which are to be provided for the well
being of the local communities and its people.
In other words, local government, if viewed from the approach above,
exits to fulfill the goals or objectives of the central government at the
grassroot level. To achieve those goals, local governments must perform
some functions, which means that the central government must also
decentralize its responsibilities and powers. This as the proponents of this
theory believe, will result to functional efficiency and effectiveness of the
system. This is because decentralization promotes the capacity building in
the grassroot government and thereby enhances the implementation of
national development planning in the local communities (Ezeani, 2004).
lxv
Again, the theorists maintained that structural functional theory
ensures the survival of the system. In this sense, (Rondineli, 1981:13-136)
remarked that decentralization can strengthen the survival of political system
by enchanting political stability and national unity and providing
opportunities for diverse groups in different parts of the country to
participate more directly in developing decision-making, thereby increasing,
their “stake” and commitment to the unity of the country. Local
governments in Nigeria can be used to strengthened the stability of diverse
ethnic groups in Nigeria which have not been integrated in the national
government. Decentralizing the powers and functions of the central
government to the local government or local communities can only do this.
From the above contention, the inability of the local governments in
Nigeria to perform their constitutional responsibilities may be traced within
the postulations of the structural functionalism theory which lay emphasis on
decentralizing rather than dominating powers and functions by the central
government.
lxvi
CHAPTER THREE
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON ENUGU STATE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT SYSTEM AND DECENTRALIZATION IN
NIGERIA
3.1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
SYSTEM IN NIGERIA
The history of local government in Nigeria has followed very closely
the pre-colonial, colonial and post or neo-colonial political developments in
Nigeria (Okoli, 2000). In other words, the fortunes of local government in
Nigeria were tied, willy-nilly, to the apron strings of the pre-colonial, and
post-or neo-colonial successes or failures in Nigeria (Okoli, 2000:33).
Before the coming of the white men (Europeans), there was nothing like
Nigeria or Nigerian state. What existed were relatively autonomous villages,
towns, and ethnic groups, each existing on its own with minimal contacts,
usually limited to trade and social transactions, and little political
relationships, with others. In those areas, which later become the East, West,
Mid-West and Northern Nigeria, there were different systems of
government, even though some anthropologist denied the existence of
government in some of these area, especially the East and Southern parts of
the North, which they classified as a cephalous and stateless societies.
lxvii
The pre-colonial system of local government administration dated
back to the traditional Nigerian political system. By this we mean Emirs,
Obas, Chiefs, Ohas, Age-grades and village councils. It was through the
interaction of these traditional political institutions that authoritative
allocations of values were made for the society. Since these institutions were
held sacred, this legitimized their actions and decisions.
In the emirate system of northern Nigeria, the principal, political ruler
was the Emir. All the output functions of government were centred in his
office. The Emirate system was not an open one; hence, recruitment into
political roles was by ascription. Local Government under this system was
under the supervision of district and village heads appointed by the Emir.
Among the Yorubas of the western part of the country, the Oba was
regarded as the father of the people and this gave sacredness, reverence and
authority to his office. A pattered constitutional role surrounded the
institution of the Oba. The Oba was assisted in national and local
government by chievefs of various categories. These chiefs played an active
part in local government. Among the Binis the Obaship was also an
established family institution. The ruler of the Benin kingdom was the Oba,
assisted by three major categories f nobles. Local government was carried
out by the town chiefs who were agents of the Oba.
lxviii
The traditional political system of Calabar resembled a confederation
of the three main communities of Qualand, Etuklad and Efikland. The head
of the Efik was Obong, the Quas was headed by the Ndidem and the Musi
was head of the Etuks. The government of the confederation was in the
hands of a council through which the three traditional rulers handled local
government matters. The Delta area of Nigeria had a traditional government
known as the House system. As a major trading and fishing area, there was a
lot of communication between the coasts and the hinterland. “Houses” were
organized under powerful chiefs and businessmen. Heads of “houses”
combined political and business leadership (Emezi, 1984). The
Amanyanabo, who was the ruler of the area, government with the help of a
selected or appointed council. The local government was carried out at the
house level.
The traditional political system of the Igbos was based on the family,
lineage, village and town units. Local government was carried out at the
village and family levels on decisions made by the Oha and Di Okpara. The
Tivs who were found in the then Northern Nigeria had a traditional political
system similar to the Igbos. In a traditional setting, every Tiv is a member of
several segmentary lineages.
lxix
With the advent of British colonial rule in Nigeria, some of the
traditional political institutions, especially the chieftaincy institutions, were
involved in the system of local government known as Indirect Rule. The
Indirect rule system implies government through local authority with overall
supervision by the colonial powers. The use of indigenous political
institutions for purpose of local government was contingent on modification
sof some aspects of traditional government repugnant to European ideas.
The indirect rule system held sway for three decades. As a system of local
government, it achieved a measure of success in the centralized and
powerful systems of northern and western provinces of Nigeria. In the
eastern provinces, an artificial base known as the “warrant chief” was
created for its operation.
The indirect rule system began to crumble only in the 1930’s
following the Abia women’s Riot” of 1929. It was replaced in the Eastern
provinces by the clan council system. Basically the clan council system
introduced an element of representative democracy into local government,
which was neglected by the “Warrant Chief System”. The system of
representation was known then as the Best Man Policy (Emezi, 1984 and
Uba, 1984).
lxx
As the country made political progress under colonial rule, it was felt
that the system of local government needed reorganization. It had been
argued that these reforms were undertaken by the colonial administration to
stem the rising tide of the nationalistic movement. It is evident that political
activities and other forms of social change forced local government reforms
to swing in the direction of elected representatives which was associated
with young, literate and progressive elements and away from the traditional
elements as equated with chiefs, elders and titled men and other persons
holding offices for life. The policy of the colonial government was to replace
the Native Administrative System, which was epitomized by the indirect rule
philosophy with a system based broadly on the English mode of Country
Councils. Following the reorganization, local government legislation,
patterned after the British model of country, urban, and district councils,
were passed in Eastern and Western Nigeria in the 1950’s.
This system of local government continued to be in existence during
the 1960 independence in Nigeria and in the era of military rule which
started from the 16 January, 1966.
However, in 1976 the then military government decided to recognize
local government as the third tier of government activity in the nation. Local
government was expected to do precisely what the words “local
lxxi
government” implied, that is, govern at the local level. This entailed the
decentralization of some significant functions of state governments to local
government. The implementation on local government reform finally took
effect in 1976 but became constitutionally recognized in the 1979
constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria.
3.2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON DECENTRALIZATION
IN NIGERIA LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM
Prior to 1976 local government reform in Nigeria, the powers and
functions of the government at the local level were diffused. There were no
uniform systems of administration in the localities in Nigeria. Thus local
government as a creation of decentralization took its cradle in 1976 as a
result of the reform. This reform established a uniform local government
system all through Nigeria and assigned them with functions. As a creation
of decentralization pronounced by this reform, the local government is
intended to:
Mobilize human and material resources through the involvement of
member of the public in their respective local jurisdictions.
Facilitate the exercise of domestic self-government close to the
people.
lxxii
Provide a two way channel of communication between local
government and the state and the federal government.
Make appropriate services and development activities responsive to
local wishes and initiatives by devolving or delegating them to local
representative bodies (Obi, 2001:11).
The 1979 constitution of Nigeria, however enshrined the provisions of
this reform, hence making local government a legal entity which caries out
similar responsibilities as in the state and central government, within the
jurisdiction meant for local government.
Under this arrangement, local government perform the following:
Concurrent Functions of Local Government
The function of a local government council shall include participation
of such council in the government of a state as respect the following matters:
a) The provision and maintenance of primary, adult and vocational
education;
b) The development of agriculture and natural resources, other than the
exploitation of minerals;
c) The provision and maintenance of health services and
lxxiii
d) Such other functions as may be conferred on a local government council
by the House of Assembly of the state.
Residual Functions of Local Government
a) The consideration and the making of recommendations to a state’s
commission on economic planning or any similar body on;
i. The economic development of the state particularly in so far as the
area of authority of the councils and of the state are affected;
ii. Proposal made by the said commission or body;
b) Collection of rates, radio and television licences;
c) Establishment, maintenance and regulations of slaughter houses,
markets, motor parks and public conveniences;
d) Establishment and maintenance of cemeteries, burial grounds and homes
for the destitute and in firm licensing of bicycles, trucks (other than
mechanically propelled trucks, canoes, wheel barrows and carts).
e) Construction and maintenance of roads, streets, street lightings, drains
and other public highways, parks, gardens, open spaces, or such public
facilities as may be prescribed from time to time by the House of
Assembly of the state;
f) Naming of roads and streets and numbering of houses;
lxxiv
g) Provision and maintenance of public conveniences, sewage and refuse
disposal;
h) Registration of all birth, death and marriages;
i) Assessment of privately owned houses or tenements for the purpose of
levying such rates as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of a
state; and
j) Control and regulation of;
i. Outdoor advertising and hoarding
ii. Movement and keeping of pets of all description
iii. Shops and kiosks;
iv. Restaurants, bakeries and other places for sale of food to the public.
3.3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON ENUGU STATE
LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM
Enugu state occupies a surface area of about 8,000sq.km with the
West African tropical rain forest region between latitude 5.550 and 7.10
0
north and longitudes 6.500 and 7.55
0 east. It is bounded in the east by
Ebonyi State, in the west by Anambra State, in the North by Kogi and Benue
State and in the South by Abia State.
lxxv
According to the federal office of statistics, figures from the 1991
national census, the population was 2.1 million in 1991. At a growth rate of
2.83% the estimated population of the state is about 2.9 million in 2003 and
if population growth continues at this rate, the estimated population by 2011
will reach 4 million according to the Enugu State economic empowerment
and development strategy (2005).
The state has 17 local government areas (L.G.As). An additional 39
were created in 2003, but have not yet been given constitutional recognition
and so remain development centres. These 17 local government area: Anuri,
Agwu, Enugu East, Enugu North, Enugu South, Isiuzo, Nkanu West, Nkanu
East, Nsukka, Orji River, Udenu, Udi, and Uzo-Uwani local government
councils.
In Enugu State, there is a state local government service commission,
which falls under the control and supervision of the commissioner for local
government and chieftaincy matter. Currently in Enugu State, the
commissioner is Hon. Frank Asogwa. This commission performs functions
such as: Recruitment of employees in the local government, training of staff
in the local government, provision of welfare services, discipline of local
government employees, promotion of staff, among others.
lxxvi
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
This chapter will focus on presentation and analysis of data collected
so far from both primary and secondary sources. We shall also test the
research hypotheses to ascertain their correctness or otherwise. However, it
is pertinent to state that out of 270 questionnaires administered by the
researcher, only 220 were successfully recovered. In other words, 39
questionnaires were returned unanswered while the remaining 11
questionnaires were not recovered at the time of collection.
4.1 DATA PRESENTATION
Table 4.1: Respondents’ Assessment of Performance of Local Government
in Enugu State
Options Frequency Percentage%
Excellent 0 0.0
Good 8 3.6
Average 75 34.1
Poor 137 62.3
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
lxxvii
In table 4.1 above, the presented respondents data showed that none of
the respondent represented by 0.0% indicated on the options with excellent.
In the other hand, 8 respondents or 3.6% evaluated the performance of local
governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu State as good, while 75
respondents or 34.1% responded that the performance of local governments
in Nigeria and in Enugu State is average.
However, 137 respondents or 62.3% evaluated the performance of
local governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu State as poor. It is
therefore observed that the assessment of the performance of local
governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu State is poor.
Table 4.2: Respondents’ Evaluation on the Decentralization of Functions
and Responsibilities in the Enugu State Local Government System
Options Frequency Percentage%
Excellent 0 0.0
Good 12 5.4
Average 80 36.4
Poor 128 58.2
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
lxxviii
Table 4.2 revealed that in a question directed to ascertain the
assessment of the respondents on the decentralization of functions and
responsibilities in the Enugu State Local Government System, none of the
respondent accepted the option with excellent.
Also from the table, 12 respondents or 5.4% accepted that the
decentralization of functions of responsibilities in the Enugu State Local
Government System is good, 80 respondents or 36.4% indicated that the
decentralization of functions and responsibilities in the Enugu State Local
Government is Average while 128 respondents or 58.2% evaluated the
decentralization of functions and responsibilities in the Enugu State Local
Government System as poor.
Drawing inferences from the table, it could be observed that the
decentralization of functions and responsibilities in the Enugu State Local
Government System is poor. The poor decentralization of functions and
responsibilities may also be also the cause of poor performance of local
governments in Nigeria.
Table 4.3: Respondents’ Evaluation on the State and Local Government
Functional Relationship in Enugu State
Options Frequency Percentage%
lxxix
Excellent 0 0.0
Good 12 5.4
Average 113 51.4
Poor 95 43.2
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
As depicted from the table above, none of the respondent indicated on
the option with excellent as represented by 0.0%. On the other hand, 12
respondents or 5.4% accepted that the functional relationship between the
Enugu State Government and local Governments in Enugu State is good,
113 respondents or 51.4% on their own assessment believe that the
functional relationship between the Enugu State Government and Lcoal
Governments in Enugu State is average. However 95 respondents or 43.2%
believe that the functional relationship between the state government and
local governments is poor.
Also from the interview conducted, the researcher gathered that there
are “state local development teams” on rural development projects and
programmes which shows good functional relationship.
Table 4.2: Respondents’ Assessment on the State Government Interventions
in the Funcitons and Financial/Revenue Matters of Local Government
lxxx
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 120 54.5
No 87 39.5
No Idea 3 1.4
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.4 further investigates on the dimensions of the state
government interventions in the local government functions and revenue
management in order to determine the decentralization in the local
governments. From the table above, 120 respondents or 54.2% indicated in
affirmative that the state government intervenes in the functions or revenue
management of local governments in Enugu State. On the other hand, 87
respondents or 39.5% indicated “no” which implies that they believe that the
state government does not intervene in the functions and financial or fiscal
management of the local governments in the state while only 3 respondents
or 1.4% indicated “no idea” to the question asked.
From the data above, there is evidence of state government
interventions in the local governments in Enugu State since majority of the
respondents revealed that the state government intervenes in local
government matters. Also the research will further examine whether the state
lxxxi
government interventions affect the decentralization in the local government
system.
Table 4.1: Respondents’ Assessment of Whether some Functions of Local
Governments have not been well Decentralized by the Enugu State
Government
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 117 53.2
No 98 44.5
No Idea 5 2.3
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.5 reveals that some functions of the local government have
not been well decentralized or effectively delegated. From the table above,
117 respondents or 53.2% indicated “yes” with respect to the question on
whether some functions of local governments have not been well
decentralized by the Enugu State Government. On the other hand, 98
respondents or 44.5% indicated “no” meaning that they do not believe that
there are some functions of local governments which have not been well
decentralized by the Enugu State Government. 5 respondents or 2.3%
indicated “no idea”.
lxxxii
In addition, the researcher engaged the respondents in interview to
ascertain some of these functions and aspects of revenue management of
local governments that have not been well decentralized by the Enugu State
Government. The respondents gave that functions such as roads construction
and maintenance, collection of taxes, rates, licenses, and fines are the major
areas where the state government has not decentralized effectively to the
local governments.
Table 4.6: Respondents’ Opinions on Whether Poor Involvement of the
Local Governments and the communities in Development Programmes
Limit the Benefits of Decentralization in Enugu State Local Government
System
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 130 59.1
No 85 38.6
No Idea 5 2.3
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
From table 4.6 above, the researcher sought the respondents’ opinions
to ascertain whether poor involvement of the local governments and the rural
communities limit the benefits of decentralization in Enugu State Local
Government System. Out of the total number of 220 respondents, 130
lxxxiii
respondents or 59.1% believed that poor involvement of the local
governments and rural communities limit the benefits of decentralization in
Enugu State Local Government System. 85 respondents or 38.6% rejected
that poor involvement of the local governments and rural communities limit
the benefits of decentralization in Enugu State Local Government System by
indicating “no” while only 5 respondents or 2.3% indicated “no idea”.
Drawing judgement from the above data, one can than argue that the
poor involvement of local governments and rural communities in
development programmes affect the decentralization in the Enugu State
Local Government System
Table 4.7: Respondents’ on Wether the Political Dispositions of Political
Leaders can affect Decentralization in the Local Governments
Administration
Options Frequency Percentage%
Agree 125 56.8
Disagree 80 36.4
No Idea 515 6.8
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Interpreting the data above, 125 respondents or 56.8% agreed that the
political dispositions of political leaders can affect decentralization in the
lxxxiv
local government. On the other hand, 80 respondents or 36.4% disagreed
that the political dispositions of political leaders can affect decentralization
in the local government and 15 respondents or 6.8% neither agreed nor
disagreed by indicating “no idea”.
Interpretation shows that majority of the respondents believed that
political dispositions of political leaders can affect decentralization in the
local government.
Table 4.8: Respondents’ Opinions on Wether Management of
Administrative Efficiency Declines when Decentralization of Political
Powers and Functions are not well Implemented
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 140 63.6
No 70 31.8
No Idea 10 4.5
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.8 above explores the respondents’ opinions on whether
management or administrative efficiency declines when decentralization of
powers and functions are not will implemented. Analytically, 140
respondents or 63.6% admitted in affirmative by indicating “Yes” which
implies that management and administrative efficiency declines when
lxxxv
decentralization of powers and functions are not well implemented. On the
contrary, 70 respondents or 31.8% indicated “no” which implies that to them
the management and administrative efficiency of local governments does not
decline when decentralization of political powers and functions are not well
implemented.
Also out of the total number of 220 respondents only 10 respondents
or 4.5% indicated “no idea”.
Table 4.9: Respondents’ Opinions on Wether there are other Problems that
are Encountered by Local Governments as a Result of Poor Decentralization
Options Frequency Percentage%
Poor Service Delivery 65 29.5
Inadequate mobilization of
Resources
55 25.0
Lack of Administrative Capacity 60 27.3
Poor Commitment Development
Objective
40 18.2
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.9 examines the problems encountered by local governments
as a result of poor decentralization of political powers and functions to the
local governments. The respondents identified these problems and from the
table above, 65 respondents or 29.5% revealed that poor service delivery is a
lxxxvi
problem which affects local governments in a situation of poor
decentralization. On the other hand, 55 respondents or 25.0% confirmed that
inadequate mobilization of resources is also a problem which results when
there is poor decentralization of political powers and functions to local
governments. In addition, 60 respondents or 27.3% disclosed that lack of
administrative capacity equally occurs in the local government
administration since decentralization intends to ensure efficiency and
effectiveness of local government administrative and poor decentralization
therefore results to weak administrative capacity. Lastly, 40 respondents or
18.2% identified that poor decentralization also causes poor commitment to
development objectives in the rural communities by local governments.
It is important to state here that the problems identified by the
respondents are the key problems in the Enugu State Local Government
System and also in most local government councils in Nigeria.
Table 4.10: Respondents’ Opinions on Wether they Attribute the Problems
of Poor Decentralization to the Poor Performances of Local Governments in
Nigeria and Particularly in Enugu State
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 125 56.8
No 92 41.8
No Idea 3 1.4
lxxxvii
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.10 above further investigates whether the respondents
attribute the problems of poor decentralization as the cause for poor
performance of local governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu
State. The data presentation above shows that 125 respondents or 56.8%
admitted that the problems of poor decentralization can also be linked to be
the cause of poor performance of local governments in Nigeria. On the other
hand, 92 respondents or 41.8% rejected that the problems of poor
decentralization cannot be linked to the cause of poor performance of local
governments in Nigeria and Enugu State in particular. Only 3 respondents or
1.4% indicated no idea.
Table 4.11: Respondents’ Opinions on Wether Attribute of Policy Choice,
Strategies and Political Processes Pursued by the government can be
Considered as the Determinant for Success or Failure of Decentralization in
the Local Government System
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 130 59.1
No 90 40.9
No Idea 0 0.0
lxxxviii
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.11 above investigates whether the respondents would attribute
the policy choice, strategies and political processes pursued by the
government as the determinant for success or failure of decentralization in
the political system and in local government. As presented in the table
above, 130 respondents or 59.1% indicated “yes” to support the question
asked. On the other hand, 90 respondents or 40.9% indicated “no” to
disagree to the question above.
Finding shows that majority of the respondents accepted that the
policy choice, strategies and political processes pursued by the government
as the determinant for success or failure of decentralization in the local
government or any political system.
Also table will examines the hypothetical statement which states that
policy choices, strategies and political processes pursued by the government
determine the success or failure of decentralization in the local government
system.
Table 4.12: Respondents’ Suggestions towards Improving the Effectiveness
of Decentralization in Local Governments System
lxxxix
Identified Solution Respondents Percentage%
Full autonomy to the LG 90 40.9
Avoid Federal & State
Interference in Local Government
70 31.8
Constitutional Amendment 60 27.3
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Table 4.12 investigates on the measures identified by the respondents
for improving effective decentralization in local government system.
Presentation from the table shows that 90 respondents or 40.9% were of the
opinion that granting full autonomy to the local government will strengthen
the decentralization in the system. From their opinion, full autonomy to local
government will empower the councils to carry out any function that may
transferred to the local government by the federal or state government.
Implicitly, these respondents emphasized more on financial autonomy as a
means of strengthening the capacity building of the third tier government.
On the other hand, 70 respondents’ or 31.8% suggested that if federal
and state governments will avoid the frequent interferences in the local
government affairs, it will help in improving the effective decentralization in
local government system. Interview conducted by the researcher revealed
that frequent interferences by the federal and state governments in the affairs
xc
of local government weakens the practice of decentralization in a federalist
state. Another, 60 respondents or 27.3% suggested that constitutional
amendment will give more constitutional powers to the local government.
Data Analysis
The assumptions contained in research hypotheses of the study will be
subjected to chi-square test to reinforce the analyses and interpretations in
the data presentation. In other words, at 5% level of significance, chi-square
(x2) will be used to ascertain the validity or otherwise and to test whether or
not there is any associated between sets of variables and anther. In general
two hypotheses were formulated, and using the chi-square (x2) formula.
E
EOx
2
Where: O = Number observed frequency in the row and jth column.
E = Expected Frequency in the marginal column
To get E (Expected Frequency) = the total number of observed frequency
divided by the number of columns.
The chi-square utilizes what is called the degree of freedom and
specified test criteria. The degree of freedom (df) is simply:
DF = (r-1) (c-1)
Where = r = Number of rows
xci
C = Number of columns
Research Hypothesis One:
Decentralization improves efficiency and effectiveness of the local
government system”.
Table for observation of hypothetical variables (table 4.13). Research
Question:- Do you think that decentralization is a means of creating and
improving administrative efficiency and effectiveness in the local
government system?
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 170 77.3
No 45 20.5
No Idea 5 2.2
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Chi-Square Table One
Outlet Observed(o) Expected
(e)
O-e (o-e)2
e
eo2
A 170 73.3 96.7 9350.89 127.6
B 45 73.3 -28.3 800.89 10.93
C 5 73.3 -68.3 4664.89 63.64
Total 220 202.17
xcii
To get expected frequency = 3.733
220
Obtain the chi-square x2 table value using the degree of freedom and
level of significance given at 5% and df = (r-1) (c-1). Degree of freedom
(df)= (3-1) (3-1) 2 x 2 = 4.
Therefore, chi-square table value = 9.488.
NB: Decision Rule: Reject Ho if x2 calculated value is greater than the
tabulated value. We therefore accept Ha and reject Ho since our calculated
value 202.17 is greater than the tabulated value of 9.488.
Conclusion
The finding from the hypothetical statement shows that
decentralization improves administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the
local government system. Also our findings in table 4.2 table 4.8 and table
4.9 showed that administrative efficiency and effectiveness in the local
government system can only be improved through proper decentralization of
political powers and functions. This is because decentralization enhances the
substantial autonomy of local government and entrust more functions
formerly performed by the federal and state governments local governments.
xciii
The major aim attached to decentralization (i.e transferring political powers
and functions to the local governments) is to enhance the efficiency and
effectiveness in discharging those functions in the grass root or local
communities. This observation shows correlation with the views of Musa
(1973), Rondinelli (1981), Lele (1975), Adamolekun (2002) and Cohen and
Uphoff (1980) on their argument that decentralization promotes efficiency
and effectiveness of the central government functions by transferring them
to the local ogvenrments or field agencies which are more closer to the
people. It therefore follows that to improve administrative efficiency in the
Enugu State local government system, some of the political powers and
functions of the state government need to be decentralized to the local
government.
Research Hypothesis Two
Poor involvement of local governments and rural communities in
development programmes affect the implementation of decentralization in
Enugu State Local Government system.
Table for observation of hypothetical variables is (table 4.6)
xciv
Research Question: Do you think that poor involvement of local
governments and the rural communities affect the implementation of
decentralization in Enugu State Local Government System?
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 130 59.1
No 85 38.6
No Idea 5 2.3
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Chi-Square Table Two
Outlet Observed(o) Expected
(e)
O-e (o-e)2
e
eo2
A 130 73.3 56.7 3214.89 43.85
B 85 73.3 11.7 136.89 1.86
C 5 73.3 -68.3 4006.89 54.66
Total 220 100.37
To get expected frequency = 3.733
220
Obtain the x2 table value using the degree of freedom ad level of
significance given at 5% and df = (r-1) (c-1). Degree of freedom
(df) = (3-1) (3-1) 2 x 2 = 4.
Therefore, chi-square table value = 9.488.
xcv
NB: Decision Rule: Reject Ho if x2 calculated value is greater than the
tabulated value. We therefore accept Ha and reject Ho since our calculated
value 100.37 is greater than the chi-square table value of 9.488.
Drawing inference from the hypothetical test, it is right to argue that
poor involvement of local government and rural communities in
development programmes affect the implementation of decentralization in
Enugu State Local Government System. This is because exclusion of the
local government and rural communities in the development programmes
does not allow the objectives of decentralization to be achieved. Supporting
this observation further, the findings in table 4.6 showed that greater number
of the respondents admitted that poor involvement of the local governments
and rural communities affect the implementation of decentralization in
Nigerian local government system. Also Ezeani (2004:1) stated that
decentralization aims at “co-ordinating and stimulating development at the
local level by involving in the planning process not only government
officials but also the people …”
Research Hypothesis Three
xcvi
Policy choices, strategies and political processes pursued by the
government determine the success or failure of decentralization in the local
government system.
Table for observation of hypothetical variables is (Table 4.11).
research Question: would you also attribute the policy choices, strategies and
political processes pursued by the government as the determinant for the
success or failure of decentralization in the local government system?
Options Frequency Percentage%
Yes 130 59.1
No 90 40.9
No Idea 0 0.0
Total 220 100
Source: Research Data, 2010
Chi-Square Table Three
Outlet Observed(
o)
Expected
(e)
O-e (o-e)2
e
eo2
A 130 73.3 56.7 3214.89 43.86
B 90 73.3 16.7 278.89 3.80
C 0 73.3 -73.3 5372.89 73.3
Total 220 100.37
Source: Research Data 2010
xcvii
To get expected frequency = 3.733
220
Obtain the x2 table value using the degree of freedom ad level of
significance given at 5% and df = (r-1) (c-1). Degree of freedom
(df) = (3-1) (3-1) 2 x 2 = 4.
Therefore, chi-square table value = 9.488.
NB: Decision Rule; Reject Ho if x2 calculated value is greater than the
tabulated value. We therefore accept Ha and reject Ho since our calculated
value 120.96 greater than the tabulated value of 9.488.
Conclusion:
Analysis of data shows that policy choices, strategies and political
processes pursued by the government will go along way in determining the
success or failure of decentralization in the local government system.
Observation shows that the policy choices, strategies and political pursued
by the government determine the functions decentralized in the local
government system.
4.2 FINDINGS
Findings are deducted from the data presentation above, and these
findings are presented below.
xcviii
Table 4.1 shows that the assessment of the performance of local
governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu State is poor. Also from
table 4.2, it is observed that the decentralization of functions and
responsibilities in the Enugu State local government system is equally poor.
Furthermore, evaluation of the state and local government functional
relationship in Enugu State has been cordial but there are areas that need to
be improved. The researcher endeavored to ascertain further information
from the respondents by engaging them to interview. Those interviewed
were selected out of the nine local government areas/councils under study,
the respondents revealed that the performance of local government in
Nigeria and particularly in Enugu State has not improved following the poor
decentralization of administrative functions to local governments. Some of
the respondents also disclosed that most a time the functions of the local
governments are overtaken by the state government mainly with an intention
to effectively execute and implement development programmes. This
observation goes further to show co-relation with our findings in table 4.3,
4.4 and 4.5 that there is evidence of interventions in the functions and
powers of local governments in Enugu State.
Table 4.6 reveals that poor involvement of the local governments and
the rural communities affect the implementation of decentralization in
xcix
Enugu State local government system. Finding from this table shows that
decentralization must involve the local governments and the rural
communities since it is stated that the aim of decentralization is to co-
ordinate and stimulate development at the local level by involving in the
planning process not only government officials but also the people through
their representatives. This is because decentralization is usually introduced
as a means of creating and improving administrative efficiency and
effectiveness in the local government system as contained in the research
hypothesis one.
Finding from the table 4.7 shows that the political dispositions of
political leaders can affect decentralization in the local government
administration. This finding has been pointed out by Picard (1980: 239-257)
as a factor that crippled down the implementation of decentralization in
Tanzania Sudan and Kenya. Also Rondienli (1981:140) observation in East
Africa showed that the unwillingness of the central ministries to transfer
functions to local government affected her decentralization programmes.
These findings can also be analyze the Nigerian case, where the political
leaders in the central (federal) and state governments intervene and hijack
the constitutional functions of local governments.
c
Finding from table 4.8 show that management or administrative
efficiency declines when decentralization of political powers and functions
are not well implemented. Observation from the interview conducted with
the chairman of local governments in Awgu, Enugu East and Nsukka Local
Government Councils showed that decentralization determines the financial
and functional autonomy of local governments. In other words, poor
decentralization of functions to local governments can as well affect the
management and administrative efficiency. This is why we stated in the
hypothesis one that “decentralization improves efficiency and effectiveness
of the local government system.
Observation from table 4.9 revealed that when there is poor
decentralization of political powers and functions, local governments
encounter problems such as poor service delivery, inadequate mobilization
of resources, lack of administrative capacity and poor commitment to
development objectives.
Finding from table 4.10 shows that these problems identified above
(that is poor service delivery, inadequate mobilization of resources, lack of
administrative capacity and poor commitment to development objectives
lead to the poor performance of the local governments.
ci
Table 4.11 observed that policy choices, strategies and political
processes pursued by the government determine the success or failure of
decentralization in the local government system. This is because in most
cases, what might necessitate the willingness to decentralizes is the policy or
strategies adopted by the government.
4.3 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The interpretations and observation based on the data presented with
respect to the problem under investigation are discussed below.
Local government as we have observed is a product of decentralized
administration, therefore the extent of decentralization of political powers
and functions to local governments determine the responsibilities they are
charged with.
In other words, any meaningful assessment of the performance of
local governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu State should
consider the examination of decentralization very crucial as we did in table
4.1 and table 4.2 from our observation, evidence shows that decentralization
of functional responsibilities to local governments in Nigeria in practice has
been under attack by interventions of the federal and state governments. The
implication of this in the Enugu State Local Government System has been
cii
poor service delivery and weak administrative capacity on the side of local
governments.
Administratively, decentralization intends to enhance the functional
relationship between the local governments and other tiers of government. In
broader analysis, the 1976 Local Government Reforms which introduced the
uniform system of local government and made provision for functional and
revenue autonomy as contained in the 1979 and 1999 constitutions of the
Federal Republic of Nigeria, aimed at strengthening the efficiency and
effectiveness of local government administration. For instance, under section
8 (1), state government is entrusted with the powers to ensure the existence
of local government both in finance and functions. In Enugu State, there is
the Joint Account Committee (JAC) between the state government and local
governments which aims at maintaining prudent fiscal management. But in
actual sense, the actions of the Joint Account Committee (JAC) have
continue to undermine the constitutional functions of local governments.
Evidence have shown that most local government councils have their
Federal Statutory Allocations delayed by the (JAC) without any justified
reason. It is on this note that justifies the hypothetical statement which states
that “decentralization improves efficiency and effectiveness of the local
government system. This is because decentralization will empower local
ciii
governments to independently control functions without interferences from
higher tiers of government especially (federal and state government).
Therefore following the above, the poor performance of local
governments in Nigeria and in Enugu State particularly may be discussed
within the challenges of decentralization in the system. From the observation
of the findings in table 4.6, table 4.7, table 4.8, table 4.9 and table 4.10
showed that the frequent interventions in the local government functions
affect the involvement of full participation of the local governments and the
rural communities in development programmes. The implication of this
observation in the local government administration shows that it affects the
administrative capacity of local governments in undertaking development
programmes within the immediate needs of the rural people. But observation
from the literature review as argued by Adamolekun (2005:51) and Prod
‘Homme (1995) showed that the central/federal government may desire to
intervene in order to co-ordinate the implementation of the national
development policies which may not delegated to the local units following
reasons such as inadequate human and material resources. It may be also
argued that due to the fiscal imbalance among the local governments in
Enugu State and the mismanagement syndrome attract the intervention of
the state government in the functions. However, other factors observed
civ
which limit the implementation of decentralization of political powers of
functions in the local government system is the political dispositions of
political leaders. It is therefore, justifiable to say that poor involvement of
local governments and rural communities in development programmes affect
the implementation of decentralization of Enugu State Local Government
System. Also political will of government officials influence the extent of
decentralization in the local government system as we stated in the research
findings because the willingness to decentralize any function to the local
government or any agency much come from the government officials
usually the political leaders at the central or state government levels. In other
words, table 4.11 discovered that in Nigeria and most a times at the state
government levels, the policy choices, strategies and political processes
pursued by the government are the determinant factors to measure the
success or failure of decentralization in the local government system.
cv
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 SUMMARY
This research has investigated the topic “local government and
challenges of decentralization in Nigeria: a study of Enugu State Local
Government System from 1999-2009”. This study has reviewed the
decentralization in the Enugu State Local Government System and
challenges for effective implementation of decentralization in the system.
The study has also unveiled the aims of decentralization in the
administration of government especially as it concerns the local government
administration.
Therefore the major objective of carrying out this research is to assess
the extend at which decentralization is implemented in the local government
system in Nigeria, but for more emphasis, the specific objectives are; to
identify the benefits of decentralization in the government system in Nigeria
and Enugu State in particular; to identify the problems encountered in the
implementation of decentralization in the Nigerian local government system
and Enugu State in particular; to examine the necessary conditions for
effective decentralization in the Nigeria local government system and to
cvi
recommend measures for improving the decentralization in the Nigerian
local government system.
The study delves into views, opinions and ideas of scholars to present
a holistic and current literature on the subject matter. In other words, the
study inclined itself to the structural functional theory. This theory views the
decentralization of political powers and functions of the federal government
or state government to the local governments as a means of maintaining the
functional interdependences in the political system. Decentralization
according to this theory helps in coordinating the activities of political
system towards achieving its targets. Therefore, it sees decentralization in
local government from a systemic view.
The study utilized two types of sources of data collection. These were
the primary and the secondary data the primary data included the interview
and questionnaire administration which the secondary data included
textbooks, journals, magazines and other government documents found
relevant to the study. The study also encountered some limitations, which
included inadequate funding, insufficient time and bureaucratic bottlenecks
in sourcing materials for the study. However, the critical examination of the
problem under investigation recorded the following findings:
cvii
i) Assessment on the performance of local governments in Nigeria and
particularly in Enugu State is poor following poor decentralization of
political powers and functions.
ii) The functional relationship between Enugu State government and
local governments need to be improved.
iii) Poor involvement of local governments and local communities affect
the implementation of decentralization in Enugu State Local
Government System
iv) Political dispositions of political leaders in the Federal and State
government determines the extent of decentralization in the local
government
v) Decentralization improves the efficiency and effectiveness of local
government.
vi) Poor decentralization of political powers and functions in the local
government also affect service delivery of the local government
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of the study and taking cognizance of the
importance of the subject matter under review, the researcher was inclined to
make the following recommendations:
cviii
1. The Federal and the sate governments should endeavour to see the need
to decentralize or divest some of their political responsibilities to the
local government in order to implement national development policies
to benefit and improve the well being of people in the grass root
communities. This is because local governments are more closer to the
people and in better position to provide those basic services which
promote the development of the rural communities.
2. In order to expand the revenue capacity and base of the local
government councils, the tax capacity and base of these councils must
be broadened in order to increase revenue outside the federation
allocations. The means, through which this recommendation may be
achieved, is to reduce the frequent interventions of state government’s in
the fiscal responsibilities of local governments.
3. Though one realizes that the inter-governmental relations between the
Enugu State Government and local government councils has improved
relatively there is need to increase the state government grants to the
council to enable it carry out the assigned responsibilities towards rural
and urban development.
4. It has been mentioned during the data analysis that federal and state
governments are important in determining the extent of decentralization
cix
enjoy by local governments. Therefore, effective functional
relationships should be developed by the federal and state governments
in order to help local governments carryout their responsibilities
effectively in developing rural communities.
5. That local governments do not only have to provide services, but also
generate a healthy level of revenue, depend on the level of autonomy
granted to them by their state governments. In this regard, it is important
to stress the need for local government autonomy especially in areas of
fiscal responsibilities and other administrative responsibilities.
6. There should be an established agency in the local government system
that will be checkmating the activities of local government councils in
Nigeria. This will help to reduce the corrupt practices of some local
government officials who mis-appropriate funds allocate for service
provision in the local communities. This measure can help to reduce
state government’s intervention in local governments, on the claim that
local governments have come short of their functions despite the huge
financial investments.
5.3 CONCLUSION
cx
Over they years, local governments have demonstrated symptoms of
incapacitations to bring about development in the rural and the urban
communities in Nigeria. Additionally, their traditional functions have not
been fully performed to achieve the raison d’etre for their establishments. It
is no longer in doubt that local government administration in Nigeria is beset
by a number of problems, one of which is the poor decentralization of
political responsibilities to the local governments. The discussion so far has
disclosed that the implementation of decentralization policies in Nigeria
have not been properly enhanced to improve the administrative efficiency
and effectiveness in the local government system. The truth is that local
governments despite their constitutional recognition as the third tier
government in Nigeria, lack the substantial autonomy which is granted in the
1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This situation puts
local governments at the mercy of the State and Federal governments. Also
the financial autonomy of the local governments has on so may occasions
been interfered with by the state governments, thereby reducing the viability
of local government service delivery.
This study emphatically makes bold to state that the weak
decentralization of political powers and functions to the local government
contributes to the poor performance of local governments in Enugu Stat and
cxi
Nigeria in general. It is also worthy to mention, that the subservient status of
local governments in Nigeria has some negative implications on local
administration bordering on their loss of autonomy.
In conclusion, we wish to reiterate that poor involvement of the local
governments and local communities in development programmes and
unwillingness of the political leaders to decentralize political powers and
functions to local governments are the major challenges to decentralization
in Nigeria. However, the need to make local governments financially and
functionally effective and less dependent on the state and federal
governments calls for urgent attention to the issue of frequent interferences
by these higher tiers of government. This is the only sure way local
governments can assume full responsibility of those decentralized functions
they must discharge in achieving national development.
cxii
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOK
Adamlekun, L (1983) Public Administration: A Nigeria and Comparative
Perspective. London: Longman.
Adamolekun, L. (2002) Public and Administration in Africa, Lagos:
Spectrum Books.
Adebayo, Okunade, (1988) Local Government in Nigeria – A Myth: The
Way Out. Leading Issues in Territorial Decentralization in Nigeria
and France. Lagos.
Bonjean, C.M. et al (1971) Community Politics. New York: Free Press.
Egonmwan, J.A. (1994) Principle and Practice of Local Government in
Nigeria. Benin City: S.M.O. Aka and Brothers Press.
Faldia B.L. and Faldia K. (1988)Public Administration: Bhawan
Publications, Delhi University. Salitya.
Kaufman, H. (1963) Publics in State and Local Government, New York:
Prentice-Hill.
Lele, Uma (1975) The Design of Rural Development: Lessons from Africa,
Baltimore: John Hopkins.
Longe John (1988) Inter Governmental Fiscal Relations and Local
Government Finance in Nigeria. Institute of Administration,
Ahmedu Bello-University, Zaria. August.
Nyerere, J.K. (1972) Decentralization. Dar es Salaam: Government Printer.
Orewa, G.O. (1992) Issues in Local Government and urban Administration
in Nigeria. Enugu; Echrisis Co.
Price, J.H. (1975) Political Institutions of West Africa. London, Hutchinson,.
cxiii
Prud’homme, R. (1995) “The Dangers of Decentralization” World Bank
Research Observer, 10(2).
Roudinelli Dennis A. et al. (1983) Decentralization in Developing
Countries. World Bank Development Report, 1983 Government
Document.
Sherwood, Frank P. (1969) “Devolution as a Problem of Organization
Strategy” in R.T. Daland (ed) Comparative Urban Research
Beverly Hills: Sage.
Uduma, Dick O. (2003) Contemporary Public Administration: The Nigeria
Perspective. Agmasun Publishers Ltd. Enugu.
Ugwu, S.C. (2001) Issues in Local Government and urban Administration in
Nigeria. Enugu: Edrisi and Co.
Uphoff, N. and M.J. Esman (1974) Local Organization for Rural
Development in Africa, Ithaca: Cornell University Center for
International Studies.
JOURNALS
Allen Imershigh, W. (1986) “Service Networks in Florida. Administrative
Decentralization and its Effects on Service Delivery” Public
Administrative Review, Volume 46, No 2. 1986.
Bodhoo, M. (1976) “The Organization and Management of Development
Agencies: A Comparative Perspective” International Review of
Administration Sciences, Vol. 42.
Cohen, J.M. and N.T. Uphoff (1980) “Participation’s Place in Rural
Development: Seeking Clarity Through Specificity” World
Development, Vol. 8.
Conyers, D. (1974) “Organization for Development: The Tanzanian
Experience”, Journal Administration Overseas, Vol. 13.
Conyers, D. (1981) “Decentralization for Regional Development: A
Comparative Study of Tanzania, Zambia and Papua New Guinea”
Public Administration and Development, Vol. 49.
cxiv
Conyers, D. (1983) “Decentralization: The Latest Fashion in Development
Administration”. Public Administration and Development Journal,
Vol. 3, No. 2 1983.
Davey, K.J. (1971) “Local Autonomy and Independent Revenues” Public
Administration, Vol. 49.
Harry Schamdt, J. (1972) “Some Critical issues in Government
Centralization and Decentralization” Public Administration
Review, Vol. 32, No. 1, 1972.
Ibodge, S.W. (1987) “Decentralization as an Approach to Mass Mobilization
in Nigeria” Journal of Public Administration Vol.2, 1987.
Luke, D.F. (1986) “Trends in Development Administration: The Continuing
Challenge to the Efficacy of the Post-Colonial State in the Third
World”, Public Administration and Development, Vol. 6, No. 1.
Musa, Omar el-Haq (1973) “Reconciliation, Rehabilitation and
Development Efforts in Sourthern Sudan”. Middle East Journal
Vol. 27.
Picard, Louis (1980) “Socialism and the Field Administrator:
Decentralization in Tanzania” Comparative Politics, Vol. 12, No.
4.
Robert Oberst (1986) “Administrative Conflict and Decentralization: The
Case of Sri-Lanka: Public Administration and Development, Vol.
6, 163-174, 1986.
Rondinelli, Frank P. (1981) “Government Decentralization in Developing
Countries”, International Review of Administrative Sciences, Vol.
XLVII, No. 2.
Smith, B.C. (1979) “The Measurement of Decentralization”, International
Review of Administration Sciences, Vol. 45.
Stephens, G.C. (1974) “State Centralization and the Erosion of Local
Autonomy” Journal of Politics, Vol. 16.
cxv
Wunsch James S. (2008) “Decentralization, Local Governance and the
Democratic Transition in Southern Africa; A Comparative
Analysis”. The Online Journal for African Studies, 2008.
GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS
Federal Republic of Nigeria: Guidelines for Local Government Reform
Government Printers, Enugu. 1988.
United Nations (1965) Decentralization for National and Local
Development New York.
INTERNET MATERIAL
http://web.africa.ufl.edu/asq/v2/yzila2.htm Decentralization, Local
Government and the Democratic Transition in Southern Africa: A
Comparative Analysis.
cxvi
APPENDIX I
QUESTIONNAIRE
Department of Public Administration
And Local Government,
Faculty of Social Science
University of Nigeria,
Nsukka.
Dear Respondent,
The questionnaire is part of a research project on local government and
challenges of decentralization in Nigeria: A Case of Enugu State Local
Government System 1999-2010, being carried out as part of the
Requirement for the award of the Master of Science (M.Sc) in Public
Administration.
You have been selected as a respondent because of your awareness on
decentralization in the Local Government System in Nigeria.
Please, answer the questions that follow honestly. All information supplied
would be used in confidence and solely for academic analysis.
Thank you for the anticipated co-operation
cxvii
Christopher C. Omeje
cxviii
Note: Please tick ( ) where appropriate or write briefly where requested
SECTION A: Personal Data
i) What is your sex?
Male
Female
ii) Your age bracket is:
Below 18 years
18 – 25 years
26 – 35 years
36 years and above
iii) What is your academic qualification
Non formal education
Standard six
WASC/GCE/SSCE/NECO
NCE/HND/Degree
Others specify
…………………………………………………………………
iv) Please indicate your local government area
…………………………........
cxix
SECTION B: Questions on Local Government and Challenges of
Decentralization in Nigeria
1. How would you assess the performance of local governments in Nigeria
and particularly in Enugu State
a. Excellent
b. Good
c. Average
d. Poor
2. How would you evaluate the decentralization of functions and
responsibilities in the Enugu State Local Government System?
a. Excellent
b. Good
c. Average
d. Poor
3. How would you evaluate the state and local government functional
relationship in Enugu State?
a. Excellent
b. Good
c. Average
d. Poor
4. Does the state government intervenes in the Functions and
financial/revenue matters of local government
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
cxx
5. Do you think there are some functions of local government which have
not been decentralized by the Enugu State Government?
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
6. Do you think that poor involvement of the local governments and the
communities in the development process limit the benefits of
decentralization in the Enugu State Local Government System?
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
7. Do you agree that the political dispositions of political leaders can
affect decentralization in local government administration?
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
8. Does management or administrative efficiency decline when
decentralization of political functions are not well implemented.
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
9. Do you think that there are other problems encountered by local
governments as a result of poor decentralization?
Please mention them as you identify.
a. …………………………………………………………………………
b. …………………………………………………………………………
c. …………………………………………………………………………
cxxi
d. …………………………………………………………………………
10. Would you attribute these problems of poor decentralization to the poor
performance of local governments in Nigeria and particularly in Enugu
State?
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
11. Would you also attribute the policy choices, strategies and political
process pursued by the government as the determinant for success or
failure of decentralization in the political system?
a. Yes
b. No
c. No Idea
12. What would you suggest as solutions to improve the effective
decentralization in local government system?
a. …………………………………………………………………………
b. …………………………………………………………………………
c. …………………………………………………………………………
d. …………………………………………………………………………
