Abstract
PurposeThis paper analyses the degree of political decentralisation and its relation to the local councils in Tanzania. It explores the institutional and political set-up of the local councils originating from the degree of political decentralisation and how it influences the tension between the bureaucrats and local politicians.Design/methodology/approachQualitative approach by a comparative case study is adopted to investigate the phenomenon in two local governments in Tanzania. The data were collected through interviews with 37 senior local government officials and eight focus group discussions with 48 administrators and councillors.FindingsThe findings indicate that the two local governments are subjected to a similar political system guided by similar rules and guidelines from the central government bureaucracy for implementing the party manifesto and central government priorities. Thus, the local politicians have little room for negotiation in adopting local agenda to reflect the preferences of the local community. Any attempt to challenge this status quo creates political tensions between bureaucrats and the administrators.Originality/valueThe findings provide invaluable insights to different stakeholders such as political scientists, government officials, and policymakers with interests in research or practice of political decentralization and political-administrative relation.
Subject
Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Geography, Planning and Development,Health (social science),Public Administration,Sociology and Political Science,Geography, Planning and Development,Health (social science)
Reference29 articles.
1. Perception of councillors on their exercise of fiscal decision making authority in local government authorities in Tanzania;Journal of Political Sciences and Decentralization by Devolution,2017
2. Brans, M. (2003), “Comparative public administration: from general theory to general frameworks”, Peters, B.G. and Pierre, J. (Eds), Handbook of Public Administration, Londres Sage, Londres, pp. 424-439.
3. Eaton, K. and Schroeder, L. (2010), “Measuring decentralization”, Connerly, E., Eaton, K. and Smoke, P. (Eds), Making Decentralization Work: Democracy, Development and Security, Lynne Riener, London, pp. 167-190.