Please note - this article was originally published on the id21 website which has now closed. This and other articles produced by id21 were archived by Eldis in 2009 and are not actively maintained. If you find links and references which are no longer valid please email eldis@ids.ac.uk.

Lessons for governance reform from Uganda

Uganda is one of Africa’s success stories, having achieved economic growth, a reduction in poverty and political stability following years of civil war. Much of this success was accompanied by a range of reforms to state institutions. What can be learnt from the Ugandan experience for other developing countries hoping for successful governance reform?

A discussion paper from the Institute of Development Studies, UK, examines the how governance reforms in Uganda were implemented, focusing on three cases: the civil service, the administration of taxes, and anti-corruption measures. The governance reforms were mainly designed to improve the quality of public goods and services through changes in how government organisations and officials worked.

Reforms in all three areas followed a similar path in their implementation and achieved some initial success. Uganda’s Civil Service Reform Programme in the 1990s was among the most successful in sub-Saharan Africa. It was able to reduce the size of the military and cut down the number of ministries. The Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) established in 1991 was successful in increasing tax revenues. The government also strengthened a number existing institutions and created new ones to curb corruption.

This success is normally attributed to President Museveni’s initial commitment to the reforms. However, the progress is now being reversed as the bureaucracy is once again expanding, tax revenues have fallen and corruption in government bodies such as the URA has increased. When the President’s attention turned to other priorities, such as the war in the north and public service delivery, governance reform measures were neglected.

The research finds that:

reforms initially benefited from committed political leaders supported by capable civil servants acting independently from organised interest groups
political support for reforms was partly in response to donors’ expectations, especially as many had funded the reform initiatives
the reform system gave power to a group of people with personal or family ties to the President: resurgence of ‘patrimonial politics’ undermined the progress of reforms and weakened state institutions.

Key lessons from the Ugandan experience include:

Political compulsions and incentives play a critical role in determining the success of governance reforms: they will continue only if there is a strong and continued political pay-off for politicians.
Government agencies that implement reforms are vulnerable to being politically manipulated, despite being autonomous.

The actions of political leaders, who have focused more on staying in power than achieving development objectives, has meant Uganda has failed to sustain its initial successes gained through governance reforms. To overcome this, the following may be needed:

a more active and engaged civil society to increase the accountability of political leaders and civil servants
a more competitive party system to create opportunities for debate and reform, and curb patrimonial politics
planning governance reforms over an extended time period so that they are sustainable beyond the personal commitment of political leaders
restoring the legitimacy of state institutions and strengthening them, although this could be a major challenge with increased political competition.

Source(s):
‘The Political Economy of Governance Reforms in Uganda’, Institute of Development Studies, Discussion Paper 386, by Mark Robinson, May 2006 Full document.

Funded by: The World Bank

id21 Research Highlight: 21 March 2007

Further Information:
Michelle Kay
Institute of Development Studies
at the University of Sussex
Brighton
BN1 9RE, UK

Tel: +44 (0)1273 606261
Fax: +44 (0)1273 621202
Contact the contributor: M.Kay@ids.ac.uk

Institute of Development Studies, UK

Views expressed on these pages are not necessarily those of DfID, IDS, id21 or other contributing institutions. Articles featured on the id21 site may be copied or quoted without restriction provided id21 and originating author(s) and institution(s) are acknowledged. Copyright © 2009 IDS. All rights reserved.

id21 is funded by the UK Department for International Development. id21 is one of a family of knowledge services at the Institute of Development Studies at the University of Sussex. id21 is a www.oneworld.net partner and an affiliate of www.mediachannel.org. IDS is a charitable company, No. 877338.