Decentralisation and conflicts: a guideline

Although decentralisation is often advocated as an instrument for conflict transformation and securing peace, little attention has been given to the conditions under which decentralisation might have positive effects or, alternatively, might even exacerbate a conflict. This document provides a brief guide to the most important connections between decentralisation and violent conflict, and discusses the implications for development cooperation.

The guide describes the ways in which decentralisation help to defuse conflicts; for example, local authorities are more familiar with the local causes of conflict, can analyse these more precisely, take measures to balance interests, and raise the chances of non-violent settlement through participatory approaches. Possible adverse effects are also described, such as local despotism and inequitable regional development.

The guide identifies key determinants of the success or failure of local and regional authorities which can be indicative of the likely effectiveness of decentralisation:

• political support by central and sub-national elites and a robust civil society are crucial
• the administrative capacity of central level to govern, and capacity building at the central and local/regional level is extremely important
• local/regional authorities need to be provided with reliable income and financial adjustments have to be made amongst regions

The report offers a variety of recommendations for development agencies considering supporting decentralisation in a conflict situation. These include that development cooperation should:

• pay greater attention to the interactions between conflicts and decentralisation to avoid an unintentional escalation of conflict (according to the principle of do no harm)
• explicitly promote the participation of civil society and traditional authorities
• contribute to setting up platforms for the non-violent settlement of conflict and alliances for peace
• focus more on strengthening the central administration's operational capacity and advocate additional institutional reforms
• support the flow of resources from central to local level and between regions
• pay greater attention to expectation management and termination criteria.