Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Decentralization and governance

By Jean-Paul Faguet


The most important theoretical argument concerning decentralization is that it can improve governance by making government more accountable and responsive to the governed. Improving governance is also central to the motivations of real-world reformers, who bear risks and costs in the interest of devolution. But the literature has mostly focused instead on policy-relevant outcomes, such as education and health services, public investment, and fiscal deficits. This paper examines how decentralization affects governance, in particular how it might increase political competition, improve public accountability, reduce political instability, and impose incentive-compatible limits on government power, but also threaten fiscal sustainability

Topics: JC Political theory, JS Local government Municipal government
Publisher: London School of Economics and Political Science
Year: 2011
OAI identifier:
Provided by: LSE Research Online

Suggested articles


  1. (1994). [1835-40]. Democracy
  2. (1991). A Democratic South Africa? Constitutional Engineering in a Divided Society. Berkeley: doi
  3. (2010). A rentier theory of subnational regimes: Fiscal Federalism, Democracy, and Authoritarianism in the Argentine Provinces." doi
  4. (2002). Amateur Legislators – Professional Politicians: The Consequences of Party-Centered Electoral Rules in a Federal System.” doi
  5. (2006). Aspectos básicos de la descentralización en México.” Mexico City: Instituto Nacional para el Federalismo y el Desarrollo Municipal.
  6. (2001). Building the Rule of Law. doi
  7. (2000). Can Fiscal Decentralization Strengthen Social Capital?” IMF Working Paper WP/00/129. doi
  8. (1995). Colombia Local Government Capacity: Beyond Technical Assistance.” World Bank Report 14085-C.
  9. (2000). Containing Nationalism. doi
  10. (2004). Decentralization and democracy in Latin America. Notre Dame, IN: doi
  11. (1983). Decentralization in Developing Countries: A Review of Recent Experience.” World Bank Staff Working Paper No.581.
  12. (1988). Decentralization in the Public Sector an Empirical Study of State and Local Government." In Fiscal Federalism Quantitative Studies,
  13. (2003). Decentralization Reforms and Commune-Level Services Delivery
  14. (1990). Decentralization: The Politics doi
  15. (1985). Decentralization: The Territorial Dimension of the State. doi
  16. (2005). Decentralized Targeting of an Antipoverty Program.” doi
  17. (2000). Democracy and Development. New York: doi
  18. (2003). Democracy and Redistribution.
  19. (2009). Democratic Decentralization Programming Handbook.”
  20. (2002). Do local officials know something we don’t? Decentralization of targeted transfers in Albania.” doi
  21. (2004). Does Decentralization Increase Responsiveness to Local Needs? Evidence from doi
  22. (2011). Egypt’s Second Grassroots Resurgence.” Available at:
  23. (2006). Federalism, Fiscal Authority and Centralization in Latin America. Cambridge: doi
  24. (1998). Fiscal Aspects of Evolving Federations: Issues for Policy and Research.” Policy Research Working Paper 1884. doi
  25. (2003). Fiscal Decentralization and the Challenge of Hard Budget Constraints.
  26. (1995). Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization: A Review of Some Efficiency
  27. (2010). Framework Law of Autonomies and Decentralization. La Paz: Government of Bolivia.
  28. (2004). Fund for Agricultural Development). doi
  29. (2009). Governance From Below in Bolivia: doi
  30. (2012). Governance from Below: Decentralization and Popular Democracy in Bolivia. doi
  31. (1990). Governing the Commons. Cambridge: doi
  32. (2006). Hamilton’s Paradox: The Promise and Peril of Fiscal Federalism. Cambridge: doi
  33. (1998). Horizontal Accountability in New Democracies.” doi
  34. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. doi
  35. (1966). New Federations: Experiments in the Commonwealth. doi
  36. (1995). On the Dangers of Decentralization.” World Bank Research Observer, doi
  37. (2009). Political Constitution of the State. La Paz: Government of Bolivia.
  38. (2003). Political Parties in a ‘No-Party Democracy’: Hegemony and Opposition Under ‘Movement Democracy’ doi
  39. (1995). Politics in Developing Countries: Comparing Experiences with Democracy. Boulder: Lynne Reinner. doi
  40. (2011). Programa de Descentralización y Buen Gobierno.” Defensoría del Pueblo del Perú. Available at
  41. (2001). Speech to the Welsh Assembly. Available at:
  42. (2005). Strategic Framework for Decentralization and De-Concentration Reforms.” Phnom Penh: Government of Cambodia.
  43. (1989). Territorial Power and the Peripheral State: doi
  44. (2004). The ‘sub-national’ connection: legislative coalitions, cross-voting, and policymaking in Argentina,”
  45. (2007). The Architecture of Government: Rethinking Political Decentralization. New York: doi
  46. (2009). The Endurance of National Constitutions. Cambridge: doi
  47. (1999). The Political Economy of Democratic Decentralization. doi
  48. (2001). The Quiet Revolution: The Rise of Political Participation and Leading Cities with Decentralization doi
  49. (2000). The Subnational Politics of Economic Adjustment: Provincial Politics and Fiscal Performance in doi
  50. (2004). Uganda: Country Review of the Framework of Decentralization.” IFAD, Office of Evaluation.
  51. (2006). Voting for Autocracy: Hegemonic Party Survival and its Demise in Mexico. New York: doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.