CITIZEN EMPOWERMENT IN THE MANAGEMENT OF EDUCATION AT THE GR(21)

However, while central government administrative structures improved through this decentralization initiatives; actual participation by the rural and urban populace in the development process (citizen empowerment) was not realized significantly. The reason for the asymmetrical outcomes lies on the fact that this type of decentralization was more of de-concentration than devolution of power through local level democratic organs, where limited scope of power was conferred to the local authorities. This is why the government of Tanzania embarked on the policy of decentralization by devolution (D-by-D) in the 1990s. During this period, the Civil Service Reform Programme (CSRP) was launched, consisting of six components, including a Local Government Reform component. The reform of Local Government was aimed at decentralising government functions, responsibilities and resources to Local Government Authorities (LGAs) and strengthening the capacity of local authorities. Reform of the local government system was initiated in 1996 through a National Conference seeking to move “Towards a Shared Vision for Local Government in Tanzania.” (Mmari, 2005: 6). This vision was subsequently summarized in the Local Government Reform Agenda, and, in October 1998本站提供代写Essay，代写Assignment，请联系QQ：949925041, was endorsed by the Government in its Policy Paper on Local Government Reform (United Republic of Tanzania, 1998).

3.6 What can decentralisation contribute to the service delivery systems?
Looking at the positive side, Gurgur and Shah (2002) argue that decentralization minimises corruption that tends to crop up with bureaucratic and centralized authority. With decentralisation, there is accountability and transparency which in turn improves service delivery. In another study, King and Ozler (1998) observed that decentralized management of schools led to improvement in achievement scores in Nicaragua.  Decentralization improves citizen’s access to social services and ensures that social services provided to citizens are responsive to the local contexts. This argument is confirmed by Faguet (2001), who found that decentralization in Bolivia helped improve consistency of public services with local preferences and quality and access of social services.  This is also in concurrence with Dyer and Rose (2005) who claim that the quality of education can be improved by providing for decision making powers at the points of their implementation. In this way, it is possible to suit the local context in terms of expertise and experience. However the question remains to be ‘what form of decentralisation is adopted?’ in other words, how much powers are conferred to the local level in as far as decision making is concerned? Is it just symbolic or is intended to ensure meaningful citizen power? If the latter is true, there should be devolution of powers to the local levels and not merely deconcentration or delegation.

Pointing out some key justifications for decentralisation of educational management by drawing on experiences of the developed countries, Caldwell (1990) cited in Govinda (1997) outlines six important arguments for the shift from central to peripheral control of education as follows:-