Zimbabwe’s local government system is a generally an established one. It has been reformed repeatedly and can arguably be considered to be mature. The system was however heavily stressed by political and economic crises during the last decade. Structures, systems and overall performance declined. The 2008-2009 cholera outbreaks that led to at least 4000 deaths mainly in Harare indicated the height of local government service delivery stress. In rural Zimbabwe the near collapse of WASH and, inter alia, road infrastructure also shows the bad shape in which local government is. This report elaborates a systems perspective to understanding local government in Zimbabwe. The framework allows the Assessment Team to disabuse both sector insiders and outsiders of ‘blamegaming’. In the report the team emphasizes that there is no magic wand approach to addressing the structural failings of the system. The theoretical framework or model used also reconceptualises centre-periphery relations putting the Council-citizen dynamic at the centre of local government development, service delivery and overall regulation. This dynamic involves a two-way cycle of needs assessment-planning-resource mobilization and service delivery, which any capacity development should aim to strengthen. This is because good local governance is a combination of systems-processes-structures and actual smart-sustainable delivery of visible and equitably accessed services to improve citizens’ quality of life. In short, citizens see and live good local government through access to quality and tangible WASH, education, health, transport, road, and inter alia, housing/shelter services. The mechanisms and means (financial, human, institutional and material) for service delivery, while slowly recovering after a decade of slippage remain weak and precarious. By indicating and discussing the areas and levels of decline as well as explaining how and why the decline occurred and continues in some areas, the report frames eight interrelated outcome suggestions for the capacity development. These are as follows: 1. Sector policy and law consistent with new constitution developed, 2. Optimal HR systems, structures and performance re-established, 3. Strong Municipal financial capacity and performance at MLGURD and in Councils installed, 4. Modernized spatial planning service/practice created and effectively deployed, 5. Knowledge-based local government delivering quality services smartly & sustainably established, 6. Engaged citizens, responsive and accountable Councils established, 7. Progressive improvements in quality of life instituted, and 8. Gender sensitive and socially-inclusive local governance established, The capacity development recommendations to achieve these outcomes can be pursued without necessarily creating a separate institutional structure other than the one in the program document. There are immense opportunities for or possibilities of using local private sector consultants and other service providers, professional associations, Knowledge Institutions, local authority and Government of Zimbabwe facilities to implement the proposed activities in relations of complementarity. The Program Coordination Unit needs to gather relevant information on sector service providers and structure mechanisms for utilizing them flexibly but with clear coordinationaccountability mechanisms. This will allow MLGURD to gather experiences of the service providers for consolidation into standard frameworks for capacity development by theme. Different deGI viii development partners need such flexibility to identify areas of support based on the capacity assessment and thematic frameworks but should also provide funding for centrally coordinated capacity development through UNDP or directly to MLGURD. This will allow strengthening of MLGURD, the Program Coordination Unit, individual service providers and other local government system actors (e.g. local government and resident associations). The use of common frameworks is critical to ensure a systematic approach to re-professionalizing the sector. Essentially the conceptual framework of Councils as centres for service delivery should guide relevant capacity development. Since the finalization of the Capacity Building for Local Government and Service Delivery program document a number of positive and strategic changes have been realized. These notably include the adoption of a new national constitution that adopts a devolved governance framework and other ongoing capacity development interventions cited in the report. These are also complemented by MLGURD’s openness to strengthen support to and regulation of the sector at both professional and policy levels. Further, individual Councils, ZILGA and residents associations are willing to contribute to an effective sector. All these developments show that any risks can be overcome.

Projects

Currently no objects available

Currently no objects available