No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

How does decentralization impact on patronage and rent-seeking? While centralization is seen to enable rent-seeking and ethnic patronage politics, many expect decentralization to reduce these practices. With few examples of meaningful reform it is difficult to establish if this is the case in the context of African states. We look at the impact of decentralization on rent-seeking and patronage in Kenya, where the devolution of significant powers to county governments has recently taken place. We suggest that devolution has not removed rent-seeking or patronage but rather brought it down to the local level in response to popular expectations that it is "everyone's turn to eat". The realization of this expectation for a broad constituency of ethnic groups and elites has, so far, facilitated the embedding of these reforms. Our findings thus suggest that the implementation of meaningful decentralization has been achieved via the decentralization of patronage networks meaning that the "our turn to eat" character of ethnic patronage politics persists. As a result, although a greater number of groups now have their turn, ethnic minorities within some counties feel marginalized, including certain trapped minorities from politically relevant groups. DECENTRALIZATION IS OFTEN PROPOSED as a potential solution to the problems facing African states. As extreme centralization is seen to undermine democracy and development and enable debilitating forms of politics, like rentseeking and ethnic patronage, 1 decentralization is suggested as the necessary corrective. 2 Decentralization is also advocated as a way to protect minorities, diffuse conflict, 3 boost local development and bring politics 'within the people's reach'. 4 For

No abstract

No abstract