CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION OF STUDY FINDINGS
4.0 INTRODUCTION
This section presents the findings of the evaluation study on whether the creation of districts has
improved service delivery based on data collected from Chikankata district which is one of the
newly created districts in Southern province of Zambia. The findings are based on the following
research question:
I.
To what level were the local people involved in the process of creating Chikankata
district.
II.
Has the creation of new districts achieved its purpose which is the improvement of
service delivery?
III.
Are the local people involved in the improvement of service delivery?
The responses to these questions are presented in one section which presents the findings
collected from the council offices, different administrative offices as well as ordinary people.
Furthermore, it presents findings collected from the senior headmen and the ordinary local
people using interview guides.
4.1 FINDINGS FROM THE COUNCIL OFFICERS, DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICES AS WELL AS ORDINARY PEOPLE AND IT ALSO INCLUDES FINDINGS
FROM THE INTWERVIEW GUIDES.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION OF RESPONDENTS
The respondents’ background characteristics are very important in any evaluation study as they
influence the behaviour of respondents. For instance, it is expected that people with higher
educational attainment are more likely to know the importance of distirct creations in line with
service delivery. Therefore,educational attainment is one of the characteristics captured in this
study and others which include sex, age, marital status and professional qualifications attained.
This part of the section presents characteristics of respondents as follows;

Sex
Figure 4.1: Percent distribution of respondents by sex
FEMALE
40%
MALE
60%
MALE
FEMALE
The sex of an individual is one demographic variable that plays a big role in studies as it impacts
on the manner in which males and females perceive and react to issues. It also determines the
influence, associations and access to resources between men and women. Sex differences in this
study, could influence the levels of importance attached to the creation of districts. The above
fugure presents the distribution of respondents by sex where out of the 25 respondents involved,
ten (40%) were females and fifteen (60%) were males.

AGE
figure 4. 2 Distribution of participants by age group
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
50 and Above
4%
32%
24%
20%
20%
The age of respondents to a large extent does influence their decision making in most setups and
does play a huge role in influencing other people around especially young ones. The study
collected information on age. This information is important as it gives a pictorial representation
of people consulted. Figure 4.2 above indicates that eight out of twenty five (32%) of the
respondents engaged were in the age group 25-29, followed by those in the age group 40-44 at
24% representing six out of twenty five. Age groups 30-34 and 35-39 had 20 percent
representation which is equivalent to five out of twenty five respondents while only one (4%)
person reported to be aged 50 years and above.
4.1.3 MARITAL STATUS
figure 4.3 Distribution of participants by marital status
NEVER MARRIED
MARRIED
4%
36%
60%
WIDOWED
Data on marital status of respondents were also collected in this evaluation study and figure 4.3
above shows the percent distribution of respondents by their marital status. The figure shows
that majority fifteen (60%) of the respondents were married, while nine (36%) of the respondents
were never married and one (4%) respondent reported to be widowed.

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Figure 4.4: Percent distribution of respondents by Educational Attainment
70%
68%
60%
Percent
50%
40%
30%
28%
20%
4%
10%
0%
SECONDARY
TERTIARY
OTHERS
Educational Attainment
At the beginning of this chapter, it was mentioned that education attained by individual
respondents can have a bearing on the way they articulate issues such as the creation of a district
in relation to service delivery improvement. Given this background, data on the education levels
of the respondents were collected and figure 4.4 above indicates the various levels of education
attained by the respondents engaged. It came out clearly most respondents (68%) representing
seventeen out of twenty five attained tertiary education while seven (28%) went as far as
secondary level and only one (4%) respondent could not specify.

PROFESSION QUALIFICATION ATTAINED
Figure 4.5: Percent distribution of respondents by profession qualifications
36%
Percent
32%
28%
4%
CERTIFICATE
DIPLOMA
DEGREE
MASTERS
Profession qualifications
The study went further by collecting data on the actual professional qualifications attained by the
respondents. Figure 4.1.5 above which shows the percent distribution of respondents by
profession qualifications attained indicates that one (4%) respondent had masters, nine (36%)
respondents had degrees, eight (32%) respondents had diplomas and seven (28%) respondents
had certificates.
Table 1: Positions of respondents in the district by frequency
Position
Frequency
Percent
Administrative Officer
1
4
Assistant Community Development Officer
1
4
Business man
1
4
Cashier
1
4
Cleaner
2
8
Community Development Officer
1
4
Conference Services Officer
1
4
District Labour Officer
1
4
District Administration Secretary
1
4
District Provincial Officer
1
4
District Treasurer
1
4
Engineer
1
4
General Worker
1
4
Human Resource Officer
2
8
Lecturer
1
4
Marketeer
1
4
Non Response
1
4
Office Assistant
1
4
Police Officer
1
4
Revenue Collector
1
4
Secretary
1
4
Socio-Economic Planner
1
4
Statistical Officer
1
4
Total
25
100
The study also found it fit to know the respondents much better by asking about the position each
respondent occupied in the district. From the table above, the data indicates that a good number
of people from various backgrounds were engaged.

NUMBER OF YEARS SERVED
Years
Figure 4.6 Percent distribution of respondents by Period of service
NON RESPONSE
4%
20-24
4%
15-19
8%
10-14'
8%
24%
05-09'
52%
01-04'
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Percent
According to the data collected on the period of service by respondents, it was found that 52% of
the respondents had only served less than 5 years, followed by those who served between 5 and 9
years at 24 %. The other respondents had served much longer as indicated in figure 4.6 above.
4.2 INVOLVEMENT OF LOCAL PEOPLE IN THE CREATION OF DISTRICTS
This section is based on the first research question which aimed at investigating the level at
which the local people were involved in the creation of Chikankata district.
4.2.1 CONSULTATION LEVELS
Table 2: Frequency distribution of responses on consultations and level of involvement
LEVEL OF INVOLVEMENT
YES
CONSULTED
OR
NOT CONSULTED
TOTAL
NO
NOT
LESS
INVOLVED
TOTAL
INVOLVED
INVOLVED
1
1
3
5
16
4
0
20
17
5
3
25
When respondents were asked to indicate whether they were consulted in the creation of
Chikankata district or not, twenty (80%) respondents indicated that they were not consulted
while five (20%) respondents indicated that they were consulted. The study went further to try
and establish the extent to which the respondents were involved in the consultations three (12%)
indicated that they were consulted enough meaning they were satisfied with the level of
involvement, while five (20%) indicated that they were less involved and remaining seventeen
(68%) respondents indicated that they were not involved in the creation of the district.
In addition, this question was answered using the interview guide, using the headmen and the
local people and from their responses the majority said that they were not involved in their
individual capacity rather they just heard about it from the headmen as well as radio stations.
4.3 ACHIEVEMENT OF IMPROVED SERVICE DELIVERY
This section is based on the research question number two which states that has the creation of
new districts achieved its purpose which is the improvement of service delivery.
Table 3: Availability of goods and services
GOODS/SERVICES
CLINICS
SCHOOLS
HOSPITALS
GOOD ROADS
SAFE AND CLEAN WATER
TRANSPORT
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
Response
Frequency
Percent
YES
17
68
NO
8
32
Total
25
100
YES
17
68
NO
8
32
Total
25
100
YES
13
52
NO
12
48
Total
25
100
YES
8
32
NO
17
68
Total
25
100
YES
12
48
NO
13
52
Total
25
100
YES
7
28
NO
18
72
Total
25
100
YES
11
44
NO
14
56
Total
25
100
The above table shows that respondents held different views regarding the availability of certain
goods and services in the area following its new district status.
4.3.2 MONITORING MEASURES
figure 4.7 percent distribution of responses on the
availability of monitering measures
88
16%
YES
48%
NO
36%
In simple terms, monitoring is concerned with establishing factual premises about public policies
which means that it is fundamentally about control and the exercise of power thus it tries to
answer questions such as what happened, how and why. It was from this perspective that this
research found it vital to find out if at all there has been monitoring measures put in place to see
to it that there is an improvement in the delivery of services since Chikankata was made a district
in 2011. Out of the total number of respondent, 48% said there were monitoring measures put in
place, 36% indicated that there were no measures while 16% did not respond to the question
which clearly showed that they were not sure.
4. IMPROVED LIVING STANDARDS FOR LOCAL PEOPLE
Table 4 Distribution of responses on improved and justification for the improved living standards
IMPROVED
LIVING
STANDARDS FOR LOCAL
PEOPLE
Non
YES
NO
Response
Total
Non Response
0
2
1
3
Creation of business opportunities
1
0
0
1
Creation of employment
2
0
0
2
JUSTIFICATION
Infrastructure Development
1
0
0
1
FOR
Decentralized decision making
0
1
0
1
Decentralized decision making
1
0
0
1
Easy access to services
13
0
0
13
Empowerment of the local people
2
0
0
2
Improved accommodation
1
0
0
1
21
3
1
25
IMPROVED
STANDARDS
Total
From the above table it was established that 21 (84 %) of the respondents said that the creation of
Chikankatadistrict has improved the living standards of the local people and gave their
justifications and 3 (12%) of the respondents said it has not while 1 (4%) of the respondents did
not respond.
In order to get detailed information from the local people as to whether the district creation has
improved their living standards, the researchers used interview guide.Majority of headmen and
the masses responded that the creation of Chikakanta as a district came with developmental
activities such as upgrade of Schools, building of a new weigh bridge, building of new schools
like Nadezwe,Nameembu and Ngangula, building of a new power station at lower Kafue gorge,
borehole, giving Chikankata district its own offices for collecting farming imputes or bringing
cooperative offices near, bringing of the DEBS building of new administrative offices.
4.2.7INVOLVEMENT
OF
LOCAL
PEOPLE
IN
SERVICE
DELIVERY
IMPROVEMENT.
This section based on research question number three, aimed at finding out if the local people are
involved in the improvement of service delivery.
4.4.1 Involvement of Local People in Service delivery Improvement
Table 4.5: Cross tabulation of involvement of Local people in service delivery and justification
INVOLVEMENT
OF
LOCAL
PEOPLE IN SERVICE DELIVERY
IMPROVEMENT
NON
Non response
Because local people are involved in
fundraising events
YES
NO
RESPONSE
1
6
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
7
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
13
11
1
Because the local people are informed
and involved in the implementation of
projects
JUSTIFICATION FOR
Because the local people are not
INVOLVEMENT OF
involved and consulted in the
LOCAL PEOPLE IN
implementation of projects
SERVICE DELIVERY
IMPROVEMENT
Because the local people participate in
most of government project at grass
root level
Because they help in funding projects
Because ward development
committees have been put in place
Because there is now centralized
decision making
TOTAL
The study revealed that out of 25 respondents, 13 respondents (52%) said that the local people
are involved in the service delivery improvement that is going on in the district, 11 respondents
(44%) said that the local people are not involved in the service delivery improvement while 1
respondent (4%) did not respond. The table further shows the justifications on how the local
people are involved and why they are not involved.
Furthermore, the study went further using interview guides to find out what roles the local people
play in the development of the district which would enhance the improvement of service
delivery. From the number of respondents that were interviewed, many responses were given and
these included , the
local people giving
community contribution of labor to the nearby
schools,teaching people on the importance of district creation, imparting knowledge to the
learners on conflict resolution, offering transport services to the community members, in the
agriculture cooperative, taxpaying as the tax is used for developing projects, community service
to the construction industry and contributing to PTA funds of their children in schools.
4.4.2 CHALLENGES FACED
Table 4.6: Distribution of challenges Chikankata District is facing
Challenges
Frequency
Percent
Non response
5
20
Bureaucracy or red tape
1
4
Centralized decision making
1
4
Inadequate accommodation for staffs
1
4
Inadequate cooperation
1
4
Inadequate funding
2
8
Lack of project coordination
1
4
Inadequate human resource
3
12
Inadequate infrastructure
5
20
Inadequate transport
2
8
No provision of clean water
1
4
Poor road network
1
4
Power struggles between the two chiefs
1
4
Total
25
100
The table above shows that out of the total number respondents on the challenges the district
faces in service delivery, 5 respondents (20%) stated that there is inadequate infrastructure, 3
respondents (12%) inadequate human resources, 2 respondents (8%) inadequate transport,2
respondents (8%) inadequate funding from the government, 1 respondent (4%) bureaucracy, 1
respondent (4%) centralized decision making, 1 respondent (4%) inadequate accommodation, 1
respondent (4%) lack of project coordination,1 respondent (4%) no provision of clean water, 1
respondent (4%) poor road networks, 1 respondent (4%) power struggle between the two chiefs
and 5 respondents (20%) did not respond.
Besides the challenges presented in the questionnaires that the district faces in the service
delivery, the research went further using interview guides and the following were the challenges
that the local people stated. No proper market ,no town, bad roads, slow
development,
vandalism , no clean drinking water, no laboratories at the clinics, late receiving of farming
products like maize seeds and fertilizers, drought, no medicine at the clinic, no empowerment
schemes,insufficientfunding from the government, slow in electrifying the district, low salaries
for government workers , slowness in building the administrative offices as a result the Council
and DEBS are operating in the same building andno staff in clinics.
4.4.3 SOLUTIONS TO CHALLENGES
Table 4.7: Distribution of solutions to the current challenges faced by the district
Solutions
Frequency
Percent
Non response
5
20
Need for improved communication
1
4
Need for adequate funding from the government
4
16
Need for adequate infrastructure
2
8
Need for community involvement
1
4
community
1
4
Need for consensus between the two chiefs in the area
1
4
Need for decentralized decision making
3
12
Need for better transport
1
4
Need for more human resource
2
8
Need to improve road network and water supply
1
4
Need to make information available
1
4
Need to promote skilled personnel
1
4
of district creation
1
4
Total
25
100
Need for consensus between the government and the
Need for Sensitization of the local people on the merits
The table above shows the solutions to challenges faced in the district when it comes to the
service deliveryand out of the total number of respondents 3 respondents (12%) responded that
there is need for decentralized decision making, 2 respondents (8%) more human resource 4
respondents (16%) funding from the government 1 respondent (4%) improved communication, 2
respondents (8%) adequate infrastructure, 1 respondent (4%) community involvement , 1
respondent (4%) consensus between government and community , 1 respondent (4%) consensus
between the two chiefs, 1 respondent (4%) better transport, 1 respondent (4%) improved road
network and water supply, 1 respondent(4%) information to be made available, 1 respondent
(4%) skilled personnel, 1 respondent (4%) sensitization of the local people on the merits of
district creation and 5 respondents (20%) did not respond.
Apart from the responses given in the questionnaire on how the challenges being faced by the
district when it comes to the delivery of services, the research went further to get more
information from the local headmen and the local people using interview guides and the
responses where that;the government should not neglect people of chinkankata and that the
government
should
always make sure that developmental
projects are completed once
started,the community should be educated on the goodness of the boreholes as it would guard
them boreholes and this is because when the government puts them up the community steals
them as a result most of the local people get water from nearby wells which are now even drying
up due to poor rainfall pattern that Zambia is experiencing.
In addition, the local people felt that in order to address or resolve the challenges there is need to
build laboratories in schools that have been made secondary to help in practical subjects, there is
also need forsubsidized irrigation system by the government, the government should increase
funding to the health sector so that people do not go to other far away clinic because presently
people take their sick relatives in as far as Kafue Gorge.Furthermore, the local community felt
that the challenges can be resolved if the community
work together to build a better market
place or even a shopping mall in Chikankata district, the government should increase funding for
the construction of the administrative Offices and that measure should be put in place by the
government to make sure and see to it that there is enough medicine as well as human resource in
the local clinics.
CHAPTER FIVE
Discussion of the research findings
INVOLVEMENT OF LOCAL PEOPLE IN DISTRICT CREATION
From the findings of the study, it is clear that when creating the district, the authorities (central
government) did not consult the majority of the residents in Chikankata district. The statistics
clearly indicate that eighty (80) percent of people explained that they were not consulted. The
news of the creation of the new district did not call for their attention. This percentage means that
the majority of people who are not involved in decentralization matters are usually sidelined
from the process on the basis that they lack the knowledge on how to come up with effective
strategies in decentralization matters like the case of district information. In the case of
Chikankata district, the lack of involvement of the majority people in the creation of the district
arose as a result of the fact that the majority are not competent enough to deliberate matters of
decentralization from the technocrat or expert side of knowledge. On the other hand, the political
view is that the failure to involve the people was due to the fear of a stronger opposition from the
majority who are historically considered not to be in support of the Patriotic front led
government. For example, government officials tend not to involve the local majority due to fear
that the opposition political parties will gain a stronger voice and support from the people in
opposing the move by the government at the expense of national development. This is in line
with () who argued that in areas where the opposition has strong grounds of support from the
people, governments tend to make people passive in the decentralization process. Therefore, only
a few of these people might be engaged due to their position or relationship with the government.
The other percentages of people who argued that they were strongly involved in the consultation
process indicates that these people were involved due to the fact that they have a strong
relationship with the government and cannot easily resist government demands. These people
include the Chiefs and their subjects. It is clearly indicated from the findings that the headman
and other subjects (including the chief) were actively involved in the district creation process
because of the incentives (in terms of salaries and allowances) they receive from government and
the fear of been removed from their positions as chiefs and headmen. However, this tendency of
engaging a few people in the district creation process strongly compromises the democratic
principles of a nation like Zambia. This action tends to qualify the view suggested by Momba
and Kalabula (2007) that decentralization and in particular district creation is merely for political
reasons.
Therefore, the statistical findings (in terms of percentages) about the involvement of the local
people in matters of decentralization does strongly correspond to the scholarly argument
provided by Green (2008) that in most developing countries, the major issue of concern is that
the process ofdecentralization does not begin with a consultation process between the central
government and the majority of the local citizens and stakeholders. What this means is that there
is still a major gap when it comes to the promotion of open grass-root consultation with various
groups of people about a possibility of creating a district and the process of decentralization in
general.
DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS ON OBJECTIVE NUMBER TWO.
The second research question in the research was designed to find out if at all the creation of
districts can lead to improved service delivery and this was particularly looking at Chikankata.
According to (Azfar, et al., 1999:1) decentralization has involved “the transfer of administrative,
fiscal and political powers and functions of the central government to lower-levels of
governments’’. This definition simply means that in an attempt to improve service delivery to the
local people there is always need to decentralize the country so that all citizens are involved in its
development. It is therefore for this reason that one cannot talk about the improvement of service
delivery in a district without acknowledging that it is as a result of decentralization which leads
to district creation and eventually leads to infrastructure development which also plays a
significant role. Therefore, it is worth noting that infrastructure development should be put first
in any process of creating a new district as it is the root of many inputs such as roads and other
buildings which can make availability of enough man power. Apart from that, In order to
effectively improve service delivery in the newly created districts, basic infrastructure services
such as water, sanitation, electricity, roads and buildings such as offices and workers houses
must be made available as this is the starting point when it comes to the effective provision of
services (Asiedu, 1977).
In addition,
an example of district creation as a tool in improving service delivery would be
Uganda which has created a number of districts. In particular, Amuru district which is a district
that was created in order to provide effective service provision and leaders in the northern
Uganda have claimed that only a year after Amuru district had been created, the merit of new
district has been obvious in more boreholes, schools and roads and better coordination and easier
monitoring among officials (Muriu, 2013 ).
It was from the examples of the literature that that lead to the formulation of research question
number two and this was because Zambia in 2011 embarked on the creation of new district with
the intention to improve the service delivery to the local and this research got the answers using
chikankata district it being one of the newly created district in Zambia. The research looked at
the improvement of service delivery in terms of the availability of clinics. From the information
obtained in Chikankata, 68% of the people said that Chikankata has enough clinics but that there
was need to staff the clinics with enough human resource as well as equipments. Apart from that
school yes 68% of the respondents said there were enough schools in the district and that
recently many primary schools have been turned into secondary schools thus children do not
need to go to faraway places for high school.
However, on a negative note, of all the respondents, 68% said that the district does not have good
roads and it was evident as we went there to carry out the research, 52% of the people said that
there are no enough hospitals in the district and people with complications always have to go as
far as Kafue Gorge to seek medical help as most clinics in the area do not have doctors and
equipment in an event that there is need for surgery. In addition, 52% indicated that there is no
proper provision of safe and clean water as people still get water from wells that are almost
drying up before October and this is very sad because it has been 50 years since Zambia got
independence yet development is very slow. Furthermore, 72% of the total number of
respondents said that the district does not have adequate transport while 56% said that the district
does not have adequate administrative offices and this is because most of the offices are still
under construction.
Involvement of local people in the improvement of delivery of services
According to Nyerere (1968) development is the participation of people in a mutual learning
experience involving themselves, their local resources, external change agents and outside
resources. People cannot be developed; they can only develop themselves by participation and
co-operative activities which affect their wellbeing. People cannot develop when they are herded
like animals into new ventures.In this statement people are understood to be an important
instrument in their own development. Therefore actual and sustainable development can only be
obtained by making the people who benefit an integral part of the development process be part
and parcel of it. This includes involvement in the decision-making and in the phase of
implementation of developmental projects and programs. When asked whether local people were
involved in the improvement of service delivery in Chikankata,the study revealed that out of 25
respondents, 13 respondents representing 52% said that the local people were involved in the
service delivery improvement that was going on in the district, 11 respondents (44%) said that
the local people were not involved in the service delivery improvement while 1 respondent (4%)
did not answer. The study further showed the justifications on how the local people were
involved and why they were not involved. It also came to light that majority of the people were
involved in the improvement of service delivery through participation in government programs
and projects.
One reasonable explanation for the minor difference between those who responded that they
were involved in the improvement of service delivery (52%) and those who responded that they
were not involved (44%) was that majority of the people were not consulted and sensitized
during the process of the district creation, henceforth even when their action were contributing to
the improvement of service delivery they did not understand.
Challenges (Saito)
From the finding of the study it was established that out of the total number of respondents on
the challenges the district faces in service delivery, 5 respondents (20%) stated that there was
inadequate infrastructure, 3 respondents (12%) inadequate human resources, 2 respondents (8%)
inadequate transport,2 respondents (8%) inadequate funding from the government, 1 respondent
(4%) bureaucracy, 1 respondent (4%) centralized decision making, 1 respondent (4%) inadequate
accommodation, 1 respondent (4%) lack of project coordination,1 respondent (4%) no provision
of clean water, 1 respondent (4%) poor road networks, 1 respondent (4%) power struggle
between the two chiefs and 5 respondents (20%) did not respond. Due to scattered various
answers obtained from respondents on the challenges the new district was facing, it was
established that the district was still facing a lot of problems ranging from simple to complex
despite it being created as a district.
SAITO (2000) argued that despite decentralization taking place in many developing countries,the
decisions are still made from top to down which is incongruent with the rationale of district
creation. Similarly in Chikankata district, the information gathered from the interview guides
revealed that people at the grass rootlevel were called for meetings often on short notice, and
when the gatherings took place, the agenda was often already decided by government officials
and what the ordinary people wished to propose could not be easily accommodated in these
community meetings. Farmers expressed that “policy making was a top-down process. “We, the
farmers, are not given chances to express our views as a result;farmers are not well represented
in the Council.” In addition, people often complained that there was lack of feedback from
previous meetings. It was discovered that even when local people expressed their views,
Councilors would promise to take action but in most cases nothing happened. Thus they felt that
the views they expressed were not taken into consideration. Furthermore, farmers said thatthe
concerns raised by the people at the bottom did not seem to attract enoughattention for problem
solving. This made them to feel that they were ignored.This finding in itself means that the local
people are not fully involved in the improvement of service delivery in Chikankata district as the
majority of the people are barely involved in decision making.
Additionally, the data collected from the interview guides revealed that ordinary people
desperately needed more information about the advantages of making Chikankata a district,
independent from Mazabuka district. The study also revealed that people were eager to receive
any explanation of the current decentralization, and their own role in it. Henceforth once
adequate information was provided; it appears that morepeople were willing to participate in
Council meetings, as well as to contribute their time and energy to group activities, which could
improve their lives. But lack of information including feedback of previous meeting discussions
tends to foster people’s suspicion that “the leaders were misappropriating public funds.” Many
people at the grassroots level considered that the leaders were just using them for their own
benefits. Some expressed that “we are used as their ladder to get to the top positions of
government.”
The findings of this study revealed that Implementation of citizen participation idea in public
services is not an easy task. This is in line with the argument of Wunsch (2008) who wrote that
many states’ attempt to create management systems that are able to engage citizens and identify
their needs of public services but have failed or have given unexpected results. On the scientific
level such failure is interpreted as a shortcoming of today's representative democracy, which is
unable to solve problems of the complex heterogeneous societies and interests, together offering
the activation of citizen participation as one of the possible solutions.
Saito, Fumihiko (2000) “Decentralization for Participatory Development in Uganda: Limitations and
Prospects,”Journal of Intercultural Studies,Ryukoku University
Wunsch. J. S. (2008)Why Has Decentralization Failed In Africa? Assessing The Lessons Of
Self- Organized, Local Governance Initiatives,Bloomington : Indiana University.
Nyerere, J.K. (1968), Freedom and Socialism. Dar es Salaam: Oxford University Press.