Abstract

This research work was conducted to investigate the role of councils in rural development in Akwaya municipal council. The study was divided into three specific objectives which were to examine the achievement of the local council in Akwaya municipality, to ascertain how representative is the local council to the Akwaya population and to assess the role council play in the decentralization process in Akwaya municipality. The descriptive research design was used in the study.

Primary data by means of questionnaire was used to collect the data for the study. The sample size of 50 respondent s was used in the study representing the five courts area of Boki Court Area, Takamanda Court Area, Assumbo Court Area, Mbolo Court Area and Messaga Ekol Court Area. The study uses simple Random Sampling as the sampling technique for the study. The data was analysed using the descriptive analysis and the hypotheses were tested using the chi-squre test.

The results of the findings revealed that achievements have an effect on the local council in Akwaya municipality, representatives have an effect to the local council in the Akwaya population and the role council plays in the decentralization process have an effect in Akwaya municipality. It was therefore recommended that leaders should be flexible enough to change their development skills to fit the needs of the municipal council.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background To The Study

The post-Cold War era partly experienced challenging debates and concerns on numerous perspectives, theories and ‘deep’ differences in opinion (ranging from policies to strategies and approaches) on various dimensions of development. The aim has been to arrive at concrete recommendations for action (Szirmai 2005). The concept of development can be traced after 1945, when Harry Truman made a global call to improve the lot of more than half of the world’s population living in destitute and poverty in ‘primitive societies’.

To salvage the poor and improve their living conditions, Truman proposed what he called ‘democratic fair dealing. By this Truman meant a society where nations would respect the rights of men; where all men have a right to freedom of thought and expression and opportunity to share and participate in the common good. According to him, democracy alone can provide the vitalizing force to stir the people into triumphant action. By this he meant according a voice to local peoples in deciding their own affairs. This Trumanian framework also suggests that politics and economics could work together to achieve development and political freedoms.

However, African states were not so concerned with the issue of development at that time because everywhere, they were involved in liberation struggles and wars of independence from their colonizers. But upon attainment of independence, most African states designed and implemented multi-sectorial strategies aimed at improving conditions germane to their multiethnic societies.

These strategies were usually based on ‘Five-Year Development Plans’ that set targets to be achieved in each sector of the economy. Unfortunately, these ‘Five-Year Development Plans’ were designed and implemented most often by Paternalistic and Dictatorial One Party and military regimes. The result has been the near absence of some basic services in some rural communities such as schools, health centers, good water supply, and better road networks. Hence, in order to create a balance in development between urban and rural areas, ‘many of these governments felt that substantial state intervention was required to achieve greater equity and poverty alleviation in rural areas’(Potter et al. 2004:452; italics added).

Existing literature reveals that most central governments in Africa historically took decisions, designed policies and implemented them without consulting local peoples: those who affect and can be affected in the realization of these policies (top-down approach). This approach more or less failed mainly because of the absence of basic freedoms for local peoples; their exclusion from decision-making processes; and the failure to incorporate local cultures and grassroots concerns in development projects.

By the 1980s, Potter contends that ‘development policy reflected a concern for accountability and efficiency, which was translated into limiting the role of the state. Both international donors and governments began looking for alternative institutions to deliver services and foster development in the rural areas’ (2004). This has been followed by discourses centered on development paradigms that involve local people in designing, planning, implementing and delivering projects based on local interests and realities. These discourses are based on the realization that:

Rural people in most developing countries have been reduced or relegated to the role of passive recipients of any meaningful development strategies and policies which affect their lives. As such they bear the consequences of the outcomes of decisions they know nothing about (Barraclough and Ghimire 1995:207).

In order to limit state powers in development processes and empower local communities within developing countries, Rodrik (2000) proposes the use of democratized political institutions. According to him, these institutions matter in rural socio-economic development because of the propensity of democratic practices to moderate social conflict and induce compromise. One approach to realize this ‘Rodrikian’ perspective can be through decentralization.

The government of Cameroon which had enacted law No. 74-23 of 5 December 1974 creating councils decided to democratise the system in order to devolve power to these decentralized units to champion the planning and implementation of rural development. The law on decentralization part 1, section 2, and articles 1 and 2 under the general provisions states: “decentralization shall consist of devolution by the state of powers and appropriate resources to local authorities; and decentralization shall constitute the basic driving force for the promotion of development, democracy, and good governance at local level”.

Local development partly via local institutions was supposedly a scheme to better understand rural communities, and be more responsive to the perceived aspirations and constraints of the rural folk (Santiso, 2000). Local Governments were considered to be more successful in promoting local participation and empowerment, democracy and cost effectiveness within the framework of the One-Party System.

In appraising the functioning and performance of the local government as institutions which have been given the responsibility to spearhead rural development, ‘Senian’ freedom would be used to illustrate the importance of freedom and empowerment in socio-economic development (Sen 1999).  In his book ‘Development as Freedom’, Sen explores the relationship between freedom and development, the ways in which freedom is both intrinsic and extrinsic to development, that is, a basic constituent of development in itself and an enabling key to other aspects such as stability and security.

He suggests a focus on what he calls capabilities, that is, substantive human freedom, encompassing processes and opportunities, and for recognition of the heterogeneity of distinct components of freedom. Sen (1999) argues that development consists of the removal of various types of unfreedoms (like political freedom) that leave people with little choice and little opportunity of exercising their reasoned agency. In other words, he argues for a focus on the capabilities of people to do and be what they value.

One of the vital points is that one human freedom tends to promote freedoms of other kinds, that is, they are relational. For example, Sen stresses that political freedom (democracy) helps to reinforce others such as economic freedom. Economic needs are considered by some to be more important than political freedom, but Sen reminds us that democracy, as well as being an end in itself, plays an instrumental role in giving people a voice and a constructive role in shaping values and norms.

Thus, he asserts that political rights, including freedom of expression and discussion, are not only pivotal in inducing social responses to economic needs, they are also central to the conceptualization of economic needs themselves. It is also important to support the effective functioning of democracy, that formal rules are not enough without good democratic practice. My point of interest from Sen’s work is the issue of democratic freedom or political rights which are the source of empowerment. This forms the core concept of my work.

Another focus of Sen’s work is the role of women in development. Here his assertion is that while improving their well-being is expedient, enhancing their agency is just as critical. One notable illustration is women’s literacy and employment levels which are the best predictions of both child survival and fertility rate reduction. This aspect of women empowerment is also discussed briefly in this work to espouse the changing role of women from passive recipients to their gradual involvement and contribution in socioeconomic development.

The assumption is that democratic freedom and empowerment are necessary conditions for successful developmental efforts. However, the study also questions whether the concept of decentralization is practical or still remains a theoretical construct. This will be discussed with regards to how representative the LGs is to the rural population which is related to the nature of elections, and if this is accompanied by empowerment. Therefore, through efforts to investigate and highlight the role of local government in rural development, the study analyses the concept of empowerment as a core concept central in development. The concept of empowerment is examined in two dimensions:

1. I) Empowerment of the LG through the devolution of power from the central government, that is, the granting of political, administrative and financial autonomy to the LG
2. II) Empowerment of the local masses through democratic political rights.

These, however, will not be discussed separately but will be incorporated into the general discussion.

1.2. Statement Of The Problem

In line with the current global trend of streamlining the role of the state, the government most developing countries have devolved power to grassroots institutions with a view to enhance development. But in reality, such devolutions have in many cases been quite inefficient to achieve this goal. The need to empower the local people responds to the growing recognition that local people in developing countries lack control over resources and opportunity to participate in decision making processes. Unless rural people are empowered to participate in the development process, development efforts will only have partial positive effects if at all they have any positive effect. It recognizes their importance as possible avenues economic change can be realized in the presence of empowerment.

However, instituting decentralization is not a guarantee for progress depending on what kind of decentralization is set in place. In this light, this study will explore to what extent democratic decentralization has led to devolution of power to the people and in what sense. Thus, with reference to the case of Akwaya municipal council, this study intends to critically explore the process of power devolution and find out why progress in this area is slow (below the expectations of the people).

Political decentralization is my focus in examining the implication of empowerment in development, where mount a sustained critique of the reality or practical decentralization in the Cameroonian context. Questions directed to the level of development are raised and an attempt is made to provide material to reveal the role of councils in rural development in Akwaya municipal council.

1.3. Research Question

1.Main Research Question

What is the role of councils in rural development in Akwaya municipal council?

1.3 2 Specific Research Questions

1. What is the achievement of the local council in Akwaya municipality?
2. How representative is the local council to the Akwaya population?
3. What role does the council play in the decentralization process in Akwaya municipality?

Check Out: Political Science Project Topics with Materials