@misc{Sperfeld2006,
  type      = {Master Thesis},
  author    = {Sperfeld, Robert},
  title     = {Decentralisation and establishment of local government in Lesotho},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-10867},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2006},
  abstract  = {This diploma thesis deals with the process of political and administrative decentralisation in the Kingdom of Lesotho. Although decentralization in itself does not automatically lead to development it became an integral part of reform processes in many developing countries. Governments and international donors consider efficient decentralized political and administrative structures as essential elements of "good governance" and a prerequisite for structural poverty alleviation. This paper seeks to analyse how the given decentralization strategy and its implementation is affecting different features of good governance in the case of Lesotho. The results of the analysis confirm that the decentralisation process significantly improved political participation of the local population. However, the second objective of enhancing efficiency through decentralisation was not achieved. To the contrary, in the institutional design of the newly created local authorities and in the civil service recruitment policy efficiency considerations did not matter. Additionally, the created mechanisms for political participation generate relevant costs. Thus it is impossible to judge unambiguously on the contribution of decentralisation to the achievement of good governance. Different subtargets of good governance are influenced contrarily. Consequently, the adequacy of the concept of good governance as a guiding concept for decentralisation policies can be questioned. The assessment of the success of decentralisation policies requires a normative framework that takes into account the relations between both participation and efficiency. Despite the partly reduced administrative efficiency the author's overall impression of the decentralisation process in Lesotho is positive. The establishment of democratically legitimised and participatory local governments justifies certain additional expenditure. However, mistakes in the design and the implementation of the decentralisation strategy would have been avoidable.},
  subject      = {Dezentralisation},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{KuhlmannWayenberg2016,
  author    = {Kuhlmann, Sabine and Wayenberg, Ellen},
  title     = {Institutional impact assessment in multi-level systems: conceptualizing decentralization effects from a comparative perspective},
  series = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  volume    = {82},
  journal   = {International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Sage},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0020-8523},
  doi       = {10.1177/0020852315583194},
  pages     = {233 -- 272},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Comparative literature on institutional reforms in multi-level systems proceeds from a global trend towards the decentralization of state functions. However, there is only scarce knowledge about the impact that decentralization has had, in particular, upon the sub-central governments involved. How does it affect regional and local governments? Do these reforms also have unintended outcomes on the sub-central level and how can this be explained? This article aims to develop a conceptual framework to assess the impacts of decentralization on the sub-central level from a comparative and policy-oriented perspective. This framework is intended to outline the major patterns and models of decentralization and the theoretical assumptions regarding de-/re-centralization impacts, as well as pertinent cross-country approaches meant to evaluate and compare institutional reforms. It will also serve as an analytical guideline and a structural basis for all the country-related articles in this Special Issue. Points for practitioners Decentralization reforms are approved as having a key role to play in the attainment of 'good governance'. Yet, there is also the enticement on the part of state governments to offload an ever-increasing amount of responsibilities to, and overtask, local levels of government, which can lead to increasing performance disparities within local sub-state jurisdictions. Against this background, the article provides a conceptual framework to assess reform impacts from a comparative perspective. The analytical framework can be used by practitioners to support their decisions about new decentralization strategies or necessary adjustments regarding ongoing reform measures.},
  language  = {en}
}