Comparative Analysis of Local Government in Zambia Between 1991-2010 And 2011-2020

In this article the author undertakes a comparative analysis of local government in Zambia between the periods 1991-2010 and 2011-2020. The author examines the motivations and objectives of the decentralisation reform measures undertaken during the two periods. After examining the motivations and objectives of the reforms the author proceeds to undertake a comparative analysis of the performance of decentralisation policies and reforms during the two periods using the parameters he develops in the conceptual and theoretical section of the paper. For most of the period under discussion (since 2002), devolution has been the preferred focus of the decentralisation reforms.Apart from the launch of the DecentralizationImplementation Plan (DIP)in December 2009, there was no progress with regard to the devolution of functions to the local level during the period 1991-2010. By and large, the districts in Zambia during the period 1991-2010 remainedunaccountable and unresponsive to the needs of the local populations.Local government during this period continued facing the same problems that limited its capacity in the pre-1991 period to deliver local services and play any meaningful role in fostering local democracy and local development.The period 2011-2020 has witnessed more progress than the previous period with regard to preparatory work for devolution. For instance, several devolution plans have been prepared. However there has been little progress with regard to implementation except for one devolution plan that has been implemented. With regard to performance, Local government during the period 2011-2020 has continued to face the same problems that limited its capacity in the previous periods.Theauthor cautions against neglecting the issue of Homogeneity and Heterogeneity when designing decentralisation reforms. He argues that previous decentralisation reforms in Zambia have failed because the reforms have treated local authorities as a homogeneous group and prescribed one-size fits all solutions. He emphasises that Local Authorities are not homogeneous but heterogeneous. They differ in, inter alia, economic/resource base, population, geographical base, local responsibilities and institutional capacity. Thus Local Authorities should be graded according to their capacity and devolution be undertaken in a phased approach and follow readiness of Local Authorities using the capacity criteria.In conclusion the author points out thatthere is need to address the issue of capacity assessment of Local Authorities as an essential component of the process of devolution. He also points out that there is need to address the shortcomings that have been identified in the approved Devolution Plans. The author observes that the shortcomings,challenges and factors that have accounted for Zambia’s unsuccessful attempts at decentralisation since independence and dismal performance of local government with regard to fostering development are well known and have been well documented. He advises that these shortcomings, challenges and factors will have to be addressed and resolved in an honest and objective manner in order for decentralisation reforms to have any realistic chance of succeeding to achieve the intended objectives