This is it. The last module of our course, Federalism and Decentralization, Evaluating Africa's Track Record. It is the last module concluding our course, but it is not the last word. This course is very much a first step into this field. We can only give you an introductory tour to the topic, but I hope it will be a stepping stone towards further specialization. Now, the topic is huge. Federalism and decentralization. They both have their own scholarly literatures. There are legal, political, economic, social angles to all the issues. Various policy areas are covered as well as the demographic and geographical elements. Democratic theory is also at the foundation of some of the issues we have discussed. In particular the individual rights versus group rights angle. This cause can only be the beginning for further specialization. Now, those of you following the advanced track will have a little bit of a chance to do this. You see, for those enrolled in the advanced track, there is an additional course requirement in the form of a three page country overview. The choice of country is completely up to you, but whatever you pick, you will see that the preceding sections of our courses provided you with a rough compass to navigate the seas of federalism and decentralization. You can now see beyond formal institutions and beyond formal constitutions. You could appreciate the political sensitivities and complexities, and you could decode the semantics. You should think yourself now as someone who has the tools to help diagnose what is going on. Various angles using economics, society, politics, law, can help you with the diagnosis. But adding them all up does not always provide you with a comprehensive and coherent answer however. These scholarly angles have different starting points and different intellectual foundations. So adding them on top of one another might in fact, obscure the picture. However one thing seems to be common to many of these analyses. And indeed, to the disappointments with federalism and decentralization. And that is the underlying deficiency in state capacity. What are seen as symptoms of federalism and decentralization are in fact often caused by this very deficiency. In the second video lecture of model three on the building blocks of federalism and decentralization, we had briefly touched upon the notion of intergovernmental relations. Intergovernmental relations constitutes a core part of federalism studies in the West. The term refers to the relations between the orders of government, something akin to international relations in many ways. But we see very little intergovernmental relations in Africa. In most African cases, the regional and local levels of government still lag behind in state capacity. In South Africa, Ethiopia, and Nigeria and certainly in many of the decentralized unitary states of Africa. Local and regional governments do not yet have the capacity, infrastructural, financial, political, to in fact do the things they're supposed to be doing along the who does what of the distribution of power. And this means that when it comes to intergovernmental relations, local and regional governments might not yet be capable of balancing off the center in a government to government relations. Deficiencies in local and regional state capacity, in trained personnel, in financial autonomy all prevent the regional and local levels of government in Africa from engaging with the central government on an equal footing. And that's why we don't see much of intergovernmental relations in Africa. The deficiency in state capacity is technically not part of federalism and decentralization. So its centrality might not be that evident to those seeking to find the so called best practices from older, established federations of the industrialized north. Many background enabling factors that make federalism and decentralization deliver are often taken for granted in the international scholarly literature. Which tends to reflect the experience of the old and more established federations in the Northern Hemisphere. And the scholarly outputs, accumulated over the years, has not always paid attention to these enabling structural factors. All of these things we just discussed that is political, financial, administrative and organizational capacity could all be grouped together under the notion of state capacity. And no matter how elegantly and elaborately designed, formal institutional reforms cannot deliver on their promises if deficiencies in state capacity prevent the subnational units from fulfilling their responsibilities, from protecting their autonomy, balancing off the center and so on. So, before any federal or decentralized solution is prescribed, one should investigate whether the prior condition of state capacity deficiency exists. In that case, the zeal for institutional engineering in order to instantly bring federalism, decentralization in the short run, should be put on hold. And long term structural policies should target these deficiencies in state capacity. What makes political and economic institutions deliver in the West might not always be because of these very institutions, but it might be a reflection of the longer-term structural factors beyond the institutional blueprints.
