| Abstract: | This study attempts to investigate the significance of democratic decentralization in the case of Amhara Regional State of Ethiopia.
The study presents the contribution of decentralization in promoting regional development. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were employed to collect the data for the study. The instruments used to collect the data are interview and focus group discussion. Primary and secondary data were collected from different actors of the Region as well as official reports and documents were consulted from regional, zonals and Weredas sector offices. The analysis was supported by literature, legal and official documents. The Major findings focused on health, education, agricultural extension services and political powers of regional Councils and their duties were depicted as follows. On average, the services in health, education and agricultural extension have increased from year to year. The community participation in socio-economic development activities has increased and their major contribution were focused on cash, material and labor for the construction of health centers, schools, farmer training centers, potable water points and rural roads.
The study reveals that the kind of services that were provided to each zone is unbalanced and it differs from zone to zone and woreda to woreda due to the capacity of the leaders in mobilizing human and financial resources. The regional government is dependent on the federal government to cover their expenditure needs. Decentralization enables and increases the involvement of the community in political and development issues. On the other hand, the study reveals that there is no space for participation of different political parties at zonal, woreda and kebele. This results in the lack of debate on policy issues and policy alternatives from political opponents that is in favor of the people. The study also presents evidences that the powers and duties of zonal and regional Councils are very weak to decide on issues under their jurisdiction because of the dominance of the executives. |
