Abstract
This study sought to provide an in-depth account of the devolution of governmental powers and responsibilities in post-independence Zimbabwe. The causes of widespread inconsistencies in devolving governance structures to lower levels have not yet been researched to find answers to improve these inconsistencies. If these inconsistencies are not interrogated, people will continue to hold a leviathan view of devolution as a divisive intervention that will bring chaos and disintegration to the country. Devolution will remain in rhetoric form; it shall be only some form of paperwork that is meant to manage public relations. Power will remain concentrated at the centre and in the process will ignore diversity and it will be difficult to hold political leaders accountable. The scarcity of literature on this area constitutes a research gap that this study sought to address. This study employed a qualitative approach within the interpretive paradigm to explain why there are inconsistencies in the implementation of devolution in Zimbabwe, focusing on the Bulawayo Metropolitan Province. In-depth interviews were conducted with key role players such as officials from the BMP, councillors, Ministry of Local Government, Public Works and National Housing officials, officials from local government associations (for example, the Urban Councils Association of Zimbabwe, Members of the National Assembly, residents’ associations’ representatives, civil society organisations, local government practitioners, and the academia. The findings of the study explore devolution implementation gaps and challenges, such as power politics, capacity constraints, fear of succession, lack of political willingness, budgetary constraints, and passive civil society. Drawing from the arguments raised in various chapters and recommendations made by the respondents, this thesis proposes an analytical framework for improving the implementation of devolution in Zimbabwe. In line with the principles of multi-level governance, localism, subsidiarity (allowing decisions to be made at the lowest possible level), and democratic governance, the thesis recommends a three-tier local government framework that devolves governmental powers and responsibilities among the three tiers of governments (national, provincial/metropolitan, and local).
D.Phil. (Public Management and Governance)