Chiefs and Everyday Governance: Parallel State Organisations in Malawi

Abstract

The combination of direct and indirect rule in Africa during late colonialism created a dual state where, broadly speaking, rural areas were under indirect rule through chiefs while urban areas were subject to direct rule. This article explores the developments that in Malawi have led to a state in which most individuals are exposed to both forms of rule simultaneously. Nowadays, people in most areas experience two parallel state organisations, and individuals are simultaneously citizens of the state and subjects under a state-enforced chieftaincy system. Recently indirect rule has also experienced institutional expansion: the chiefly hierarchy, which previously reached only to district level, now extends all the way to the president, making the choice between the two parallel organisations relevant at higher levels of the state hierarchy. For those able to straddle the two forms of rule, this means a wider scope of opportunities for interacting with the state. Yet, for others it means a dissonance between the rhetoric of civil, rights-based governance and the practice of chiefly rule. For state agencies, it makes available more options for effective governance, and the president in particular can choose between two separate institutional hierarchies in the execution of state power. For academic studies, the case of Malawi demonstrates that research on state building and governance should not equate bureaucratic capacity with state capacity. The chieftaincy, standing outside the bureaucracy, constitutes a key component of state power and everyday governance, and it is difficult to imagine it being replaced by any part of the formal government in the foreseeable future.

Re-assertion of Elite Control in Masoka’s Wildlife Program, Zimbabwe

“…That the Chief and the councilor chose to ignore community voices in Masoka is a broader phenomenon that relates to traditional power relations between Chiefs and their subjects in rural African (Eggen, 2011;Ncube, 2011;Russell and Dobson, 2011). In our case study, the Chief dismissed committee members who refused to honor his requests because that challenged "his authority."…”

Barriers or enablers? Chiefs, elite capture, disasters, and resettlement in rural Malawi

“…Various fields have recognised the function and authority of traditional leadership systems in low-income countries, particularly in the context of community development and democracy (see, for example, van Rouveroy van Nieuwaal, 1996;Ntsebeza, 2004;Williams, 2004;Logan, 2009;Eggen, 2011;Arnall et al, 2013b;Goodfellow and Lindemann, 2013;Baldwin, 2014). Arnall et al (2013b) contend that understanding the functioning of elites is important for development actors as it provides insights into how best to work with them in delivering public goods and services.…”

Conditions for Sustainability of the Elephant Marsh Fishery in Malawi

“…The overall result is usually voluntary compliance, which eventually disadvantages locals and erodes local institutions [6,40]. On the other hand, if central states fail to devolve power to local communities in joint management arrangements and consistently take a position of commanding, imposing and enforcing alien rules and regulations, the negotiated fulcrum is lost, sporadic illegal activities may emerge and the management system is likely to fail [17,[48][49][50][51][52].…”