Decentralization as a Post‐Conflict Stabilization Tool: The Case of Sierra Leone
| Date | 01 December 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1784 |
| Author | Benjamin Edwards,Serdar Yilmaz |
| Published date | 01 December 2016 |
DECENTRALIZATION AS A POST-CONFLICT STABILIZATION TOOL:
THE CASE OF SIERRA LEONE
BENJAMIN EDWARDS
1
AND SERDAR YILMAZ
2
*
1
Urban Institute, USA
2
World Bank, USA
SUMMARY
Sierra Leoneˈs experience with decentralization as a post-conflict stabilization tool highlights both the value of making and
keeping a promise to empower citizens through local government and the importance of fully implementing that promise over
a longer time horizon. The emergence of the country from civil conflict into peace and stability is one of the greatest success
stories of post-conflict stabilization. Although the nation has enjoyed over a decade of peace (and peaceful transitions from party
to party), many of the conditions that laid the groundwork for conflict remain, especially in rural areas, due to the partial imple-
mentation of the decentralization framework. Based on a post-conflict perspective, we review the re-emergence of local govern-
ments in Sierra Leone following the civil war, the institutional and legal framework within which they exist, and some of the
remaining challenges the nation faces. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
key words—decentralization; conflict; local governance; Sierra Leone
INTRODUCTION
From 1991 to 2002, Sierra Leone was engulfed in a conflict rooted in corruption, the unequal distribution of infra-
structure and services, and governance institutions that were widely perceived as illegitimate. Since 2002, the coun-
try has made progress in recovering from its civil war, in part due to the nationˈs policy of decentralization. The
post-conflict recovery process has been as much about re-establishing state capacity and legitimacy as about
rebuilding the livelihoods of people, especially in rural areas (Zhou, 2009). This paper examines why decentrali-
zation was selected as a post-conflict stabilization strategy, how partial implementation of that strategy has been
effective in addressing certain roots of the conflict, and why the partial implementation of decentralization has
failed to achieve some of the promises made in the immediate post-war context.
Given its successes to date in achieving political stability, and in the light of the ongoing challenge of delivering
on key promises made during the immediate post-conflict period, Sierra Leone offers an important case study in
understanding the role of decentralization in the post-conflict period, particularly with respect to decentralization
as a multi-part concept. Earlier work analyzed the progress toward decentralization in its constituent parts and con-
cluded that “[t]he post-conflict stabilization strategy of political, administrative, and fiscal decentralization has
proven successful in preventing a return to violence”(Edwards et al., 2015, p. 59). It has also suggested that the
inefficient and horizontally inequitable distribution of critical social services, which is a direct result of partial
decentralization,
1
threatens the progress made toward long-lasting peace and stability (Edwards et al., 2015).
This paper applies a theory of conflict mitigation to derive predictions about the impact of partial decentraliza-
tion on post-conflict stability in Sierra Leone. The paper employs qualitative methods to understand whether partial
*Correspondence to: S. Yilmaz, World Bank, USA. E-mail: syilmaz@worldbank.org
The findings, interpretations, and conclusions are entirely those of authors and do not represent the views of the World Bank, its executive di-
rectors, or the countries they represent.
1
There is a growing body of literature presenting the linkages between political, administrative, and fiscal dimensions of decentralization. See
Smoke (2015a,2015b), Local Development International (2013), Yilmaz, Beris and Serrano-Berthet (2010), and Schneider (2003).
public administration and development
Public Admin. Dev. 36, 347–358 (2016)
Published online in Wiley Online Library
(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/pad.1784
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial