DEVOLUTION AND SERVICE DELIVERY IN KENYA: A CASE STUDY OF

TRANSNZOIA COUNTY

BY

Name: WAMALWA DAVIS WAFULA

REG NO: MPA-D/25032/151/DF

A REPORT PRESENTED TO THE COLLEGE OF HIGHER DEGREES AND

RESEARCH POST GRADUATE STUDIES (DISTANCE) IN PARTIAL

FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD

OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

AND MANAGEMENTOF KAMAPALA

INTERNATIONAL

UNIVERSITY

OCTOBER, 2017

1
 DECLARATION
I Wafula Devisdeclare that this research dissertation is my original work and has

not been submitted to any other University or institution of higher learning for the

award of a degree or any other certificate.

Signed: Date:

Wamalwa DavisWafula

2
 APPROVAL

I confirm that this research report was carried out by the candidate under my

supervision.

Signed: Date:

Dr...........................

SUPERVISOR

Signed: ------------------------- Date: ---------------------

Dr........................................

ASSOCIATE SUPERVISOR

3
 DEDICATION

In appreciation for my family, I dedicate this work to my beloved wife and children

for their patience, encouragement and family support during the preparation of the

research proposal and final report.

4
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to acknowledge all those persons that have helped me in one way or another

in the development of the research proposal and final thesis. The list is very long to

acknowledge individually.

However in a special way, I would like to express my profound appreciation to my

supervisor, Dr. .........................forinsightful comments, critical reviews, patience

and belief in me that helped to shape this thesis into its final form.Iam also indebted

toDr...........................my associate supervisor under whose professional guidance

and advice helped me to complete this dissertation.

My heartfelt thanks also go to the warmth and encouragement generated by my

colleagues and some very personal staff friends at KIU who were my guiding pillars

of strength. I am grateful to those who provided me with data and to Mr. Baguma

who assisted me in data collection, including all participants. This dissertation could

not have been completed without the assistance of all these people. Thank you all

for your support and help with data collection.

Finally, I would like to thank the College of Education, Open and Distance Learning

for giving me this opportunity to study the Master of Public Administration at the

great facilities provided by the Kampala International University.

5
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

APA American Psychological Association

CUK The Cooperative University of Kenya

MCA Members of County Assembly

LATF Local Authority Transfer Fund

DFRD District Focus for Rural Development

RDA Regional Development Authorities

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science

6
 ABSTRACT

Devolution brings decision making closer to people to improve governance and

service delivery. The general objective of the study was to establish the effect of

devolution on service delivery in county governments in Kenya. This study tested the

null hypotheses that financial devolution, political devolution and administrative

devolution practices had no relationship with service delivery in county governments

in Kenya. The study adopted both descriptive survey research design and

explanatory research design to identify, analyze, and describe the relationship

between devolution and service delivery. The study population was 154 county

government officials from Trans Nzoia County. This study used multiphase sampling

technique to select the subjects of study. Both stratified random sampling technique

and simple random sampling techniques were adopted to get the sample of counties

and county government officials to be included in the study. A pilot test was

conducted to detect weaknesses in design and instrumentation. Data analysis was

done using descriptive statistics, correlation and regression analysis. The findings

revealed that devolution had a significant effect on service delivery in county

governments in Kenya. Specifically, the study found that financial devolution,

political devolution, administrative devolution all had positive and significant effect

on service delivery. The study concluded that governance devolution had a

significant effect on service delivery. However, it was also concluded that e-

government had no significant moderating effect on the relationship between

governance devolution and service delivery. The study recommends that financial

7
devolution, political devolution, and administrative devolution need to be facilitated

to improve service delivery in county governments in Kenya.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION......................................................................................................ii

APPROVAL...........................................................................................................iii

DEDICATION.......................................................................................................iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...........................................................................................v

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS...........................................................vi

ABSTRACT..........................................................................................................vii

CHAPTER ONE.....................................................................................................1

1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................1

1.1 Background of the study..............................................................................1

1.1.1 Historical Perspective...................................................................................1

1.1.2 Theoretical Perspective................................................................................3

1.1.3 Conceptual Perspective................................................................................3

1.1.4 Contextual Perspective.................................................................................5

1.2 Statement of the Problem...............................................................................5

1.3 Purpose of the Study......................................................................................8

1.4 Specific objectives..........................................................................................8

1.5 Research Questions........................................................................................8

1.6 Hypothesis..................................................................................................8

1.7 Scope of the Study.........................................................................................9

1.7.1 Geographical scope......................................................................................9

1.7.2Content scope..............................................................................................9

8
1.7.3 Time scope..................................................................................................9

1.8 Significance of the study...............................................................................10

1.9 Operational Definitions of Key Terms.............................................................12

1.10 Limitations of the Study...............................................................................13

CHAPTER TWO...................................................................................................14

LITERATURE REVIEW.........................................................................................14

2.1 Introduction..............................................................................................14

2.2 Theoretical review.....................................................................................14

2.2.1 Souffle Theory...........................................................................................14

2.2.2 Principal-Agent Theory...............................................................................15

2.2.3 A Sequential Theory of Devolution..............................................................16

2.3 Conceptual framework...............................................................................17

2.4 Review of the study variables........................................................................19

2.4.1 Financial Devolution...................................................................................19

2.4.2 Political Devolution.....................................................................................22

2.4.3 Administrative Devolution...........................................................................24

2.4.5 Service Delivery.........................................................................................26

2.5 Empirical Review...........................................................................................28

2.5.1 Financial Devolution and Service Delivery....................................................29

2.5.2 Political Devolution and Service Delivery......................................................31

2.5.3 Administrative Devolution and Service Delivery............................................34

2.6 Research Gaps..........................................................................................35

CHAPTER THREE................................................................................................39

METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................39

9
3.1 Introduction.................................................................................................39

3.2 Research Design...........................................................................................39

3.3 Research Population......................................................................................39

3.4 Sample Size..................................................................................................40

Table 1: Sample Size Selection and allocation.......................................................40

3.5 Sampling Procedure......................................................................................41

3.6 Research Instruments...................................................................................41

3.7 Validity of Instruments..................................................................................41

3.8 Reliability of Instruments...............................................................................42

3.9 Data Gathering Procedure.............................................................................42

3.9.1 Before Data Gathering................................................................................42

3.9.2. During Data Gathering..............................................................................43

3.9.3. After Data Gathering.................................................................................43

3.11 Data Analysis..............................................................................................43

3.12 Ethical Considerations.................................................................................44

CHAPTER FOUR..................................................................................................45

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION....................................45

4.0 Introduction.................................................................................................45

4.1 Socio Demographic Characteristics.................................................................45

4.2 The relationship between devolution and service delivery in Trans Nzoia County
.........................................................................................................................47

4.3 Relationship between financial devolution and service delivery in county

governments in Trans Nzoia County.....................................................................52

4.4 Relationship between Political devolution and service delivery in Trans Nzoia
County...............................................................................................................53

10
4.5 Relationship between Administrative devolution and service delivery in Trans
Nzoia County......................................................................................................54

4.6: Relationship between Financial devolution, political devolution, administrative

devolution and service delivery............................................................................55

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION..........................................58

5.0 Introduction.................................................................................................58

5.1 Discussion....................................................................................................58

5.1.1 Relationshipbetween Financial devolution and service delivery......................58

5.1.2 Relationshipbetween political devolution and service delivery........................60

5.1.3 Relationship between administrative devolution and service delivery.............61

5.2 Conclusion....................................................................................................62

5.2.1 Relationship between Financial devolution and service delivery.....................62

5.4 Areas for further study..................................................................................65

5.5 Contribution of the Study..............................................................................66

REFERENCES......................................................................................................67

APPENDICES .....................................................................................................75

11
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: Socio economic Characteristics of Respondents....................................45

Table 4.2.2 Descriptive Statistics on political devolution........................................49

Table 4.3 Pearsons Correlation Coefficient statistic for the relationship between

financial devolution and service delivery in county governments............................52

Table 4.4 Pearsons Correlation Coefficient statistic for the relationship between

Political devolution and service delivery................................................................53

Table 4.5 Pearsons correlation coefficient between Administrative devolution and

service delivery..................................................................................................54

Table 4.6 Regression analysis: Relationship between Financial devolution, political

devolution, administrative devolution and level of service delivery.........................55

12
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 Introduction

This chapter contains the background of the study which is organized into the

historical, theoretical, conceptual and contextual Perspective. It also presents the

problem statement, purpose of the study, specific objectives, research questions,

Hypothesis, scope of the study and significance of the study.

1.1 Background of the study

1.1.1 Historical Perspective

In both developed and developing countries, devolution has been recognized as an

important theme of governance (Dasgupta and Beard, 2016). Devolved units are in a

better position to promote participation through transparent decision making

because they are closer to the people (Nupia, 2016). Devolved bodies can be more

easily watched, accessed, and monitored and can therefore be held more

accountable (Faguet and Fabio, 2016). By transferring some powers of decision

making especially to the grass-root levels and promoting community participation in

government, devolution provides opportunities to hold public representatives and

government officials accountable. In other words, devolution provides an avenue to

promote better local representation and transparent decision making, which

ultimately leads to good governance.

Since independence in 1963, the Kenyan government has had several

decentralization programmes, including the Special Rural Development Programme

(1969), District Development Planning (1971), District Focus for Rural Development

1
(1983) and the Rural Trade and Production Centers (1988). Though resourceful,

these programmes failed because of lack of funding, excessive bureaucratic capture

by the central government, and lack of popular participation (Mitullah, 2014). Since

the failure of the mentioned initiatives, the Kenyan government has been exploring

ways of improving success rates of development projects and emphasizing citizen

participation.

Devolution became a central component of the post-violence reforms not only as a

way to prevent future ethnic conflict, but also to improve accountability by mitigating

corruption, encouraging participation, and improving service delivery. According to

the Constitution of Kenya (2010), the objects of devolution are to promote

democratic and accountable exercise of power and to give powers of self-

governance to the people and enhance the participation of the people in the exercise

of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them (Constitution of

Kenya, 2010). Devolution was meant to give voice to previously marginalized

communities for the dual purpose of solving conflict and aiding institutional ills.

County boundaries were drawn with not only population density in mind, but also

historical and cultural ties and the views of the communities affected in order to

ensure that counties were representative of the ethnic geography of Kenya

(Constitution of Kenya, 2010). Devolution was meant to give each group a measure

of autonomy and control over their own affairs22 - goals that extend much further

than the cessation of conflict.

2
1.1.2 Theoretical Perspective

This study will also be guided by on the efficiency gains theory (De Mello 2014). The

theory states that that the efficiency gains that could be achieved owing to

decentralization could also be outweighed by other efficiency gains arising from

central provision such as economies of scale, ability to attract better personnel, and

the like (De Mello 2014; Tanzi 1996). This indeed is a valid argument, but other

scholars have also argued that those gains arising from central provision may also

be overestimated (Oates 1972; Prudhomme 1995, Sewell and Wallich 1995).

Nonetheless, the theory that allocative and efficiency gains could be achieved have

important implications for improving public service delivery that need to be

evaluated, especially in the context of developing and transition countries.

It is also argued that efficiency gains in service delivery have to be examined from

the accountability perspective (e.g., Prudhomme2013; Treisman2012). For example,

Rondinelli (1990) argued that central government ministries rarely have the

incentives to perceive citizens as their clients. In the same line, Dillinger (1994)

suggested that systems where central ministries concentrate large proportions of

expenditure discretion would have more difficulties responding to their national

constituencies demands. He argues that in those systems, people have fewer

channels of communication and expression with the government.The Further

explanation of the theory is in chapter two.

3
1.1.3 Conceptual Perspective

Devolution involves a rescaling of responsibilities or powers from the national to the

regional political organization (Lobao, Martin, &Rodrigeuz-Pose, 2009). The actual

form and politics of such rescaling will vary substantially between states, however,

amounting to a radical transfer of powers and resources in some cases and a more

modest and rhetorical shift of responsibility and service delivery in others (Cox,

2009). This underlines the need for researchers to be specific about precisely what is

being rescaled or devolved in particular contests. In practice, devolution grants the

devolved governments the capacity to develop policies that are better tailored to the

economic and social conditions of their areas, encouraging policy divergence through

the introduction of local solutions to local problems (Mackinnon, 2015). Moreover,

Mackinnon (2015) indicated that devolution creates logic of inter-territorial

comparison and competition, potentially resulting in policy learning and transfer as

the different administrations monitor developments elsewhere, adopting successful

or popular policies from other jurisdictions. Recently, Yusoff, Sarjoon, Awang, and

Efendi (2016) contends that in devolution, powers are transferred to autonomous

units governed independently and separately without the direct control of central

government, the units enjoy corporate status and powers to secure their own

resources to perform their functions, the units maintain control over a recognized

geographical area, devolution implies the need to develop local government

institutions and it is an arrangement of reciprocal, mutually beneficial and coordinate

relationship between central and local government.

Service delivery is defined by Oboth (2011) noted that in as far as the Local

Government Act, the constitution and any other statutes that are studied, there is no
4
definition of the phrase (service delivery) either deliberately or ignorantly. However

he said, Service is a system or arrangement that supplies public needs. Whereas

delivery is periodical performance of a service. Therefore service delivery is a system

or arrangement of periodical performance of supplying public needs. Helmsing

(2015) in his study defines service delivery as a deliberate obligatory decision by the

elected or appointed officials to serve or deliver goods and services to the recipients.

Heskett (2016) defines service delivery as an attitudinal or dispositional sense,

referring to the internationalization of even service values and norms.

1.1.4 Contextual Perspective

The study will be conducted in the Trans Nzoia County.Trans Nzoia County

comprises five electoral constituencies; Endebess, Cherangany, Saboti, Kwanza and

Kiminini. It covers an area of 2,496 sq. km which represents 0.42 percent of the

Republic of Kenyas total surface area. It has a total population of 818,757 persons

comprising of 407,172 males and 411,585 females, and with a population growth

rate of 3.7%.

Government performance is measured through service delivery to its people

(Eigema, 2016). The best yardstick to measure government performance of good

governance is through service delivery to the people. Abe and Monisola (2014)

contend that government is expected to deliver better services to its people. They

provided the indices of measuring service delivery to the people as low inflation,

better education, provision of improved health care at affordable rates, provision of

clean water, provision of good roads and good road networks to the rural areas for

the transport of agricultural products and raw materials.

5
1.2 Statement of the Problem

Devolution as a new system of governance in Kenya embraces the principle of

subsidiarity which advocates for the transfer of responsibilities and decision making

powers from the central government to the local governance units. According to the

World Bank (2012), devolution has been successfully practiced in, among world

countries, the United States of America, Canada, Britain and Australia. In Africa, it

has been practiced in South Africa, Nigeria and Ethiopia. In most of these countries,

devolution is seen as a process of giving political autonomy to administrative units

that are already in place.

The World Bank (2012) observed that, in contrast, Kenyas devolution entails

creating new political and administrative units all at once. Based on the 2010

constitution, this new governance system carries the promise for a more equitable

model of sustainable economic development for most Kenyans. Through devolution,

it is hoped that historical injustices and spatial inequities will be addressed. The

World Bank (2012) further observed that management of the state through the

central and local authorities in Kenya over the past fifty years of independence has

experienced many challenges.

Kenyans have witnessed poor performance by successive governments due to weak

governance of public institutions across the nation. A recent study by Ntoiti (2013)

found out that for several decades, Kenyan Local Authorities, decentralized units of

the central government, failed to provide effective service delivery to the citizens

mainly due to weak corporate governance practices. Other factors that contributed

to the poor state of service delivery in the country (Ntoiti, 2013) included weak;

6
financial management practices, human resource management practices,

information technology and government regulations.

Ntoiti concluded that all these factors had a negative and significant relationship with

the weak performance of the Local authorities. Stigler (1957) and Oates (1972),

both cited in Ntoiti (2013), argued that the central mandate of Local Authorities, as

devolved public institutions, is to bring governance closer to the people as advocated

by the decentralization theorem, which states that each public service should be

provided by the jurisdiction having control over the minimum geographic area

(subsidiarity) that would internalize benefits and costs of such provision.

Most of the newly created counties may lack effective governance structures

necessary to enhance service delivery for their economic development. Article 203(2)

of the 2010 Kenyan constitution stipulates that counties will get a minimum of 15%

of total national revenue. As of today, the Kenyan Government adopted a 15%

allocation as the amount to distribute to all the counties. This figure has elicited

sharp reactions from the County Governors and Senators. Given that the 15%

allocation through CRA is meant to be supplementary, with the counties expected to

generate the bulk of the income locally for their sustainability, it calls for county

leaders to engage strategic management practices in order to attain sustainable

economic growth status. Devolution, being a new phenomenon in Kenya, the

capacity of the counties to face up with the identified challenges and potential

structural complexities to ensure that they are managed sustainably is a concern. A

7
study to offer guidance and suggest solutions to the challenges and potential

complexities identified is, thus, necessary.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study was to establish the relationship between devolution and

service delivery in Trans Nzoia County, Kenya.

1.4 Specific objectives

i. To examine the relationship between financial devolution and service delivery

in county governments in Trans Nzoia County.

ii. To establish the relationship between Political devolution and service delivery

in Trans Nzoia County.

iii. To establish the relationship between Administrative devolution and service

delivery in Trans Nzoia County.

1.5 Research Questions

i. What is the relationship between financial devolution and service delivery

incounty governments in Trans Nzoia County?

ii. What is the relationship between Political devolution and service delivery in

Trans Nzoia County?

iii. What is the relationship between Administrative devolution and service

delivery in Trans Nzoia County?

8
1.6 Hypothesis

i. H1: There is no relationship between financial devolution and service delivery

in county governments in Trans Nzoia County.

ii. H2: There is a relationship between democratic devolution and service

delivery in Trans Nzoia County.

iii. H3: There is no relationship between Administrative devolution and service

delivery in Trans Nzoia County.

1.7 Scope of the Study

1.7.1 Geographical scope

The study was conducted atTrans-Nzoia County.Trans-Nzoia County is a county in

the former Rift Valley Province, Kenya, located between the Nzoia River and Mount

Elgon 380 km Northwest of Nairobi. At its centre is the town of Kitale which is the

capital and largest town. The county borders Bungoma to the west, UasinGishu and

Kakamega to the south, ElgeyoMarakwet to the east, West Pokot to the north and

the republic of Uganda to the Northwest. Trans Nzoia covers an area of 2495.5

square kilometres

1.7.2Content scope

The research was concentrated on determining the relationship between devolution

and service delivery in Trans Nzoia County. Devolutions wasmeasured using financial

devolution, democratic devolution and administrative devolution. Service delivery

was measured using quality of work, efficiency and citizen certification

9
1.7.3 Time scope

The research was conducted between June and October 2017. The time chosen was

deemed be appropriate to collect, analyze and write a research report.

1.8 Significance of the study

The study will be beneficial to several stakeholders. The specific stakeholders include

the government of Kenya, county governments, the society, scholars and

researchers

1.8.1 Government of Kenya

The best yardstick to measure government performance is through service delivery

to the people. The study will inform national government policy on the devolution

and service delivery in county governments in Kenya. By illustrating the effects of

governance decentralization on service delivery in county governments in Kenya,

policy makers may use the finding of this study to better align or revise the existing

legal framework, policies and the guidelines of devolution process. Further, the

findings may influence the national to develop appropriate policies to enhance

devolution processes so as to improve service delivery to the public and thus propel

the country towards achieving Vision 2030. Furthermore, national government might

use of the findings to come up with strategic interventions to enhance devolution

and service delivery to citizens. The study also informs best strategies to employ in

making turnaround in service delivery both at national and county governments. This

study finally came up with policy recommendations, which can be used by national

government to improve service delivery to the public.

10
1.8.2 County Governments

The county governments, which took effect with the new constitutional dispensation,

may benefit a lot from the study findings primarily because the study addresses the

effect of governance decentralization on service delivery. The county governments

are expected to play critical role in improving service delivery to the people. This

study might informs county assemblies and county executive on whether devolution

of fiscal power, political power and administrative power has improved service

delivery to the people as was expected by the constitution. The members of county

assembly may use the finding of this study to better align or revise the existing

county legal framework, to promote service delivery in the counties. This study

finally came up with policy recommendations, which can be used by county

assemblies and county executives to improve service delivery in county

governments.

1.8.3 The Society

This study is of help to the entire society as it seeks to explain the relationship

between devolution and service delivery. By illustrating the influence of governance

decentralization on service delivery in county governments in Kenya, the finding may

shape future devolution debate in the entire Kenya society. The findings of this

study may also benefit the entire Kenyan society including private practitioners by

providing them with in-depth understanding of the relationship between devolution

and service delivery. Similarly, the finding of this study will be of significance to

other African developing countries and especially the members of the East African

community, that are culturally, economically, and politically similar to Kenya.

11
1.8.4 Scholars and Researchers

To the scholars, the study is value-added to the existing body of knowledge as it

developed comprehensive model on governance decentralization in Kenya and

beyond. The study will thus benefit the scholars wishing to undertake further studies

aimed at improving governance decentralization structures in local and global

context. Academic researchers will be able to refer to the data used in the study and

benefit from the findings, cognizant of the fact that rich literature is unavailable in

Kenya relating to devolution and service delivery. Moreover, the framework

developed in the study may be useful tool to academicians and other researchers

wishing replicate this study in different states, counties and countries. Nevertheless,

this study serves as a stepping stone for newer research on devolution and service

delivery.

1.9 Operational Definitions of Key Terms

The following terms have been defined in the context of this research;

Administrative Devolution: Administrative devolution refers to a set of policies

that transfer the administration and delivery of social services such as education,

health, social welfare, or housing to sub-national governments (Akorsu, 2015).

Devolution: Devolution refers to transfer of administrative and politicalpowers from

central government to lower tires giving them decision making powers (Average,

2010)

12
Financial Devolution: Fiscal Devolution is defined as set of policiesdesigned to

increase the revenues or fiscal autonomy of sub-national governments (Akorsu,

2015).

Political Devolution: This refers to a set of constitutional amendments

andelectoral reforms designed to open new, or activate existingbut dormant or

ineffective spaces for the representation ofsub-national politics (Akorsu, 2015).

Service Delivery: Thisrefers to the provision of social services, such aspotable

water supply, good roads, healthcare delivery andelectricity, intended to alleviate

human suffering and byextension, enhance the quality of life of the citizens (Abe

&Monisola, 2014)

1.10 Limitations of the Study

Instrumentation:The research instruments on devolution and service

deliverymight not be standardized. Therefore a validity and reliability test were done

to produce a credible measurement of the research variables.

Mortality and Attrition:Not all questionnaires may be returned neither completely

answered nor even retrieved back due to circumstances on the part of the

respondents such as travels, sickness, hospitalization and refusal/withdrawal to

participate. In anticipation to this, the researcher reserved more respondents by

exceeding the minimum sample size. In other words, the researcher provided more

questionnaires exceeding the minimum sample size. The respondents were also

13
reminded not to leave any item in the questionnaires unanswered and was closely

followed up as to the date of retrieval.

Testing: the use of research assistants could bring about inconsistency in the

administration of the questionnaires in terms of time administration, understanding

of the items in the questionnaires and explanations given to respondents. To

minimize this threat, the research assistants were oriented and briefed on the

procedures to be done in data collection.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the theoretical framework, the conceptual framework and

review of related literature and also gives views about what other authors have

written about the topic and the review is to take the form of the objectives so that

other authors contribution in related literature is recognized in this chapter.

2.2 Theoretical review

The study focused on three theories upon which the study is anchored. These

include the Souffle theory, Principal-Agent theory, and The Sequential theory of

devolution.

2.2.1 Souffle Theory

The Souffl Theory was proposed by (Parker, 1995) who postulates that there are

three major elements of devolution namely administrative, fiscal, and political

14
devolution. Parker (1995) emphasized that devolution is a multi-dimensional process

that proceeds with successes and setbacks. The theory argues that like a Souffle

that needs just the right combination of milk, eggs, and heat to rise, a successful

program of devolution must include the right combination of political, fiscal, and

institutional elements to improve rural development outcomes (Farooq, Shamail,

&Awais, 2008; Laryea-Adjei, 2016).

Devolution initiatives will therefore be subject to a continuous process of

modification reflecting changes in social, political and economic conditions (Laryea-

Adjei, 2016). There is therefore the need to include all dimensions of political, fiscal

and administrative devolution. Parker suggests a conceptual model, the souffl

theory, which incorporates the essential elements of political, fiscal, and

administrative devolution as they combine to realize desired outcomes.

2.2.2 Principal-Agent Theory

The Principal-Agent theory (also referred to as Agency Theory) is one of the

dominant theoretical perspectives for analyzing and describing public governance

reforms. The theory was proposed by Jensen and Meckling (1976).The theory

proposes a principal with specific objectives and agents who are required to

implement activities to achieve those objectives. The core of the principal-agent

theory is the agency relationship, which depends on power positions and

information flows between principals and agents. The question, then, is how

principals can manage the interests of agents so that they are in line with the goals

they (principals) wish to achieve (Masanyiwa, Niehof, &Termeer, 2012).

15
The theory is of the view that principals must solve two basic tasks in choosing and

controlling their agents: first, they have to select the best agents and create

inducements for them to behave as desired. Second, they have to monitor the

behavior of their agents to ensure that they are performing as agreed (Ayee, 2015).

A problem arises when the parties goals conflict or when it is difficult or expensive

for the principal to verify what the agent is actually doing. In this case Information

asymmetry introduces an issue of adverse selection and a moral hazard problem

(Simiyu et al., 2014) The problem of agency is particularly salient on the demand-

side of public service delivery, which arises from the fact that clients, politicians and

frontline providers have divergent interests compounded by the fact that multiple

principal-agent problems result in the delivery chain (Kamara, Ofori-Owusu, &Sesay,

2012).

The theory is relevant to this study as it provides a good basis to understand the

relationship in which one party (the principal) delegates work to another (the

agent), who performs the task. Politicians in counties (members of county assembly

and governors) act as the agents of citizens and must act in good faith to fulfill the

principles of the principal. Without addressing the principal agent problems, poor

governance practices such as lack of social accountability arise.

2.2.3 A Sequential Theory of Devolution

The Sequential theory of devolution was proposed by Falleti (2014) . The theory

contends that devolution is a set of state reforms. As such, devolution does not

include transfers of authority to non-state actors. Akorsu (2015) cited Falleti (2014)

16
and noted devolution reforms may take place in authoritarian as well as democratic

contexts, which means that the concepts of devolution and democratization should

not be conflated. Notably, (Falleti, 2014; Falleti, 2015) opined that sequential theory

of devolution classifies territorial devolution into political, administrative, and fiscal

dimensions.

The Sequential theory of devolution is relevant to the current study as it portends

that territorial devolution takes either political, administrative, and fiscal dimensions.

Consequently, this study will examine the governance devolution variables namely;

financial devolution, administrative devolution and political devolution based on

sequential theory of devolution.

2.3 Conceptual framework

A conceptual framework is the diagrammatic presentation of variables, showing the

relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variables

(Mugenda&Mugenda, 2013).

The conceptual framework hereunder illustrates the perceived link between the

independent (devolution variables) and dependent variable (service delivery). The

conceptual framework is founded from the literature review, which depicts a linkage

between devolution and service delivery. Previous studies support existence of

significant relationship between devolution and service delivery (Freinkman&

Plekhanov, 2009; Kosec&Mogues, 2015; Muriu, 2012; Olatona&Olomola, 2015;

Shen&Zou, 2015; Sujarwoto, 2012; Wangari, 2014)

17
 DEVOLUTION SERVICE DELIVERY

(Independent Variables) (Dependent Variable)

Financial devolution

Revenue decision making

Expenditure decision
making
Local revenue generation

Political devolution
Legislative powers
Political competition
Civil liberties
Service Delivery
Accessibility of services
(roads, water , health and
sewer)
Quality of services
Efficiency of services

Administrative devolution

Autonomy to contract
services in the County
Autonomy to hire and fire 18
County employees
Autonomy to sign
employee contracts at
(Source: Adopted from Olatona&Olomola (2015) and modified by researcher

(2017).

The conceptual model in figure 2.2 shows the relationship between seven variables

under study, financial devolution, administrative devolution, political devolution, and

service delivery. Financial devolution is conceptualized as revenue decision making,

expenditure decision making, local revenue generation and sub-national

borrowing.Political devolution is constituted as legislative powers, political

competition and civil liberties. Administrative devolution is conceptualized as

autonomy to contract services, hire and fire county employees, sign employment

contracts and expertise and capacity of the county employees. Service delivery is

conceptualized as accessibility of services, efficiency of services, quality of services

and citizen satisfaction in relation to water, health, rural roads, and sewer services.

2.4 Review of the study variables

The seven variables under study namely: financial devolution, administrative

devolution, political devolution, and service delivery are discussed below.

2.4.1 Financial Devolution

In general, financial devolution refers to transfer of competencies, responsibilities

and financial resources from the central (state) level to the lower levels of

government (Finzgar&Oplotnik, 2013). Financial devolution is said to exist when sub-

national governments have the decision-making power to raise revenues and

perform spending activities (Kim, 2008). Alternatively, Akorsu (2015) posits that

19
financial devolution refers to a set of policies designed to increase the revenues or

fiscal autonomy of sub-national governments. Fiscal devolution is the most traceable

type of devolution as it is directly linked to budgetary practices. It necessitates the

transfer of powers to raise and retain financial resources to fulfill assigned

responsibilities to local level political and administrative organizations. It entails the

assignment of functions and responsibilities regarding revenue collections and

spending to sub-national government institutions (Yusoff et al., 2016)

Rodrguez-Pose and Krijer (2009) summarized arguments in favor of fiscal

devolution. They claim it promotes higher efficiency, better public service, greater

transparency and, eventually, economic growth. It is often argued that devolution

increases economic efficiency because local governments are better positioned than

the national government to deliver public services as a result of proximity and

informational advantage. This proximity is particularly important in low-income

countries or emerging markets where in absence of market opportunities, vulnerable

populations rely heavily on state action for their survival. In the same context,

Gemmell, Kneller, and Sanz (2013) investigated whether the efficiency gains

accompanying fiscal devolution generate higher growth in more decentralized

economies, applying pooled-mean group techniques to a panel dataset of 23 OECD

countries, 1972 2015. The study found that spendingdevolution tends to be

associated with lower economic growth while revenue devolution is associated with

higher growth.

Fiscal devolution policies can assume different institutional forms. An increase of

transfers from the central government, the creation of new sub-national taxes, and

20
the delegation of tax authority that was previously national are all examples of fiscal

devolution. Financial devolution are policies designed to increase the financial

autonomy of sub-national governments (Ozmen, 2014). It is an important tool in

revenue performance and therefore instrumental in providing services closer to

people in large and densely populated economies (Clegg&Greg, 2010). The theories

underpinning financial devolution include the Souffle theory, Sequential theory of

devolution and the new public management theory.

Devolving financial authority to lower levels of government reduces central

governments control over public expenditure. It involves the transfer of power to

local authorities to make autonomous decisions about revenue collection strategies

and expenditures decisions. With such autonomy comes local responsibility such as

that of cost recovery through user charges and property taxes (Stanton, 2009).

Fiscal devolution may confer power on locally-elected officials to collect and spend

own revenue. In the most fulsome application of fiscal devolution, local government

is awarded substantial taxing powers and the freedom to determine the extent of

public service delivery (Grindle, 2016) . By distributing authority and responsibility

for fiscal management and public service delivery, minorities are given a stake in the

system and this helps in conflict management (Ndungu, 2014).

Halaskova and Halaskova (2014) posits that measurement of fiscal devolution

include expenditures of lower levels of government as a percentage of total

expenditures or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Secondly, it also include revenues of

lower tiers of government as a percentage of total revenues or GDP; division of tax

21
revenues between central and local governments. Lastly, the level and extent of tax

authority and share of expenditures in selected public sector areas such as

education, health, social security as a share of total expenditures of lower levels of

government. The efficiency of adevolution framework is high when the

intergovernmental fiscal framework is welfare enhancing, incorporates incentives to

encourage prudent fiscal management at all government levels and responsibilities

to tax and spend at the sub national levels is accompanied by adequate political

authority (Ndungu, 2014). For instance, Shah (2016) identifies matching grants and

tax revenue assignments as incentives that may motivate the enhancement of fiscal

effort at the sub-national levels of government.

This study focused on four dimensions of financial devolution namely revenue

decision making, expenditure decision making, local revenue generating capacity

and national borrowing. These dimensions were chosen as the study postulated they

would have closer relationships with service delivery. There is limited research that

has empirically tested the relationship between financial devolution and service

delivery in developing countries. Existing studies have largely been drawn from

developed countries and may not be generalized in local context due to different

institutional, regulatory and cultural factors.

2.4.2 Political Devolution

According to Akorsu (2015) political devolution is a set of constitutional amendments

and electoral reforms designed to open new, or activate existing but dormant or

ineffective spaces for the representation of sub-national politics. It aims to give more

authority to citizens and their elected representatives in decision making and public

22
administration. Political devolution also tends to support democratization by

providing more opportunity for citizens and their elected representatives to affect

the creation and implementation of policies (Ozmen, 2014). Thus, political devolution

involves the transfer of political authority to the local level through the establishment

of elected local governments and political parties. The theories that apply to political

devolution are Souffle theory, sequential theory of devolution and principal-agent

theories.

Political devolution aims to give more authority to citizens and their elected

representatives in decision making and public administration. Political devolutionalso

tends to support democratization by providing more opportunity for citizens and

their elected representatives to affect the creation and implementation of policies

(Ozmen, 2014). Political devolution also means a set of constitutional amendments

and electoral reforms designed to open new spaces for the representation of sub-

national policies. These policies are designed to devolve electoral capacities to sub-

national actors. The popular election of mayors and governors, the creation of sub-

national legislative assemblies, and constitutional reforms that strengthen the

political autonomy of sub-national governments prepare the ground for the success

of such structures (Falleti2014).

Hasnain (2008) examined the impact of the political party structure on the incentives

for politicians to focus on patronage versus service delivery improvements in

Pakistan. The researchers argued fragmentation and factionalism both exacerbate

the information problems that voters have in assigning credit (blame) for service

delivery improvements (deterioration), thereby creating the incentives for politicians

23
to focus on targeted benefits. Polarization, particularly ethnic polarization, reduced

the ability of groups to agree on the provision of public goods, again causing

politicians to favor the delivery of targeted benefits. In the same context, Obicci

(2014) revealed that political devolution can be used as an instrument to promote

the provision of service delivery. Furthermore, devolution is shown to have had

significant effect on service delivery in the ten local governments examined in the

study.

The proponents of political devolution argue that bringing citizens closer to

government and allowing them to hold elected officials accountable are an important

foundation to achieve better local government and public services (Grindle, 2016).

Notably, when local or county government is brought closer those receiving services,

beneficiaries of these services would become active in demanding quality. Since

those responsible for quality of services are local governments, citizens will be more

motivated to demand improvements if services decrease in quality (Sujarwoto,

2012). According to Saavedra (2010) political devolution gives citizens through their

elected leaders more power in public decision-making. The premise is that service

delivery policies takenat the sub-national level will be better informed and more

relevant to diverse interests in society than those taken only by national political

authorities.

In this study, political devolution is constituted as legislative powers, political

competition and civil liberties. There is paucity of empirical evidence on the influence

of political devolution on service delivery in developing countries. Most empirical

studies indicate the influence of political devolution on service delivery is highly

24
contingent on local conditions such as economic, social and cultural factors.

Therefore, research finding from developed countries may not be generalized in local

setting.

2.4.3 Administrative Devolution

Administrative devolution (sometimes referred as institutional devolution) involves

the full or partial transfer of any array of functional responsibilities to the local level

institutions such as health care service, the operation of schools, the management

service personnel, the buildings and maintenance of roads and garbage collection

(Yusoff et al., 2016). As Stanton (2009) asserts, administrative devolution is

concerned with the functional tasks of devolution. It relates to the assignment of

service delivery powers and functions across levels of government and determining

where responsibility is situated. Administrative devolution involves transfer of civil

servants and public functions to the lower level of government (Olatona&Olomola,

2015). It involves full or partial transfer of functional responsibilities to the sub-

national units of governance. The national government assigns local governments

the authority to hire and fire local staff without prior approval of central government

(Stanton, 2009).

Administrative devolution seeks to redistribute authority, responsibility, and financial

resources for providing public services between different levels of government.

Therefore, the responsibility for planning, financing, and managing certain public

functions is transferred from the central government to subordinate levels of

government, semi-autonomous public authorities or corporations, or area-wide,

25
regional, or functional authorities (Ozmen, 2014). Administrative devolution is often

seen as part of civil service reform and is generally perceived as the narrowest form

of devolutionbecause local institutions to which tasks are transferred are not based

on political representation controlled from below (Yusoff et al., 2016).

On the other hand, it involves the de-concentration of bureaucratic structures away

from the central government to lower levels of structure without removing their

accountability to the central government. In this way as Smoke (2013) reveals,

administrative devolution requires the establishment of administrative bodies,

systems and mechanisms at local and regional levels to manage and support the

devolution process while maintaining links between the formal government bodies

and other key local actors. The effective devolution of government administration

requires local and regional governments the ability to establish ordinance,

regulations or by laws which they consider to be appropriate within their jurisdiction

(Yusoff et al., 2016).

Review of previous research reveals that there is limited evidence on influence of

administrative devolution on services delivery. Majority of research has analyzed the

impact of devolution on services delivery from either political or fiscal devolution

rather than from all three forms of devolution (fiscal, administrative, or political)

simultaneously. Allowing for interaction of all three dimensions of devolution in the

same analysis can bring more robust evidence on the relationship between

devolution and service delivery and hence bring stronger basis for providing policy

advice in the future. In this study, administrative devolution is conceptualized as

26
autonomy to contract services, hire and fire county employees, sign employment

contracts and expertise and capacity of the county employees.

2.4.5 Service Delivery

Improving service delivery through increased accountability has been a significant

implicit motivation behind the trend towards devolution in developing

countries(Hasnain, 2010). The standard theoretical argument for the transfer of

responsibilities to lower tier so f government is that the closer proximity of local

policy-makers to citizens increases the flow of information and better enables the

public to monitor ,and to hold to account, government officials. Conversely, elected

local policy-makers, responding to this greater citizen vigilance, focus on improving

service delivery in order to get re-elected (Hasnain, 2010) Service delivery is an

essential function in the relationship between government and citizens

(Abe&Monisola, 2014). Government performance is measured service delivery to the

people (Eigema, 2016).

A government is expected to deliver better services to its people, and the indices of

measuring service delivery to the people include low inflation, better education,

provision of improved health care at affordable rates, provision of clean water,

provision of good roads and good road networks to the rural areas for the transport

of agricultural products and raw materials (Abe &Monisola, 2014). Elsewhere,

Carlson et al. (2015) depicted service delivery as the relationship between policy

makers, service providers and poor people. Service delivery encompasses services

and their supporting systems that are typically regarded as a state responsibility.

27
These include social services (primary education and basic health services),

infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads and bridges) and services that promote

personal security (Carlson et al., 2015).

Literature reviewed reveals that majority of governance devolution and service

delivery studies have used service accessibility as a measure of service delivery

(Abe&Monisola, 2014; Joshi, 2013; Macharia et al., 2014; Olatona&Olomola, 2015;

Wangari, 2014; Wei-qing&Shi, 2010) . There is segmented body of research work

that has measured service delivery using quality of service and citizen satisfaction.

For example, a study by Sujarwoto (2012) on political devolution and local public

services performance in Indonesia. The study used citizen satisfaction on public

service performance (health services, education services and general administration

services) to measure service delivery. Another study in Russia by Freinkman and

Plekhanov (2009) on fiscal devolution and the quality of public services used service

quality as a measure of service delivery. Likewise, Kyriacou and Roca-Sagale's

(2011) used government quality to measure service delivery. Alternatively, Nayak

and Samanta (2014) carried a study in India on the role of participation in public

service delivery and combined four indicators to measure service delivery.

The researchers used accessibility, availability, reliability and quality of services as a

measure of service delivery. Majority of previous devolution research focused on one

measure of service delivery that is, service accessibility. There is paucity of research

on the influence of governance devolution on service delivery measured from

multiple dimensions (citizens satisfaction, quality of the service and service

28
accessibility). In this study, service delivery is conceptualized as accessibility of

services, efficiency of services, quality of services and citizen satisfaction in relation

to water, health, rural roads, and sewer services

2.5 Empirical Review

Empirical literature review is a directed search of published works, including

periodicals and books, that discusses theory and presents empirical results that are

relevant to the topic at hand (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, &Griffin, 2010). Literature

review is a comprehensive survey of previous inquiries related to a research

question. Although it can often be wide in scope, covering decades, perhaps even

centuries of material, it should also be narrowly tailored, addressing only the

scholarship that is directly related to the research question(Miller & Kaifeng 2008).

Through the use of a systematic approach to previous scholarship, literature review

allows a researcher to place his or her research into an intellectual and historical

context. In other words, literature review helps the author declare why their

research matters (Miller&Kaifeng 2008). In this study, the empirical literature review

discusses previous studies that are relevant in examining the relationship between

devolution and service delivery based on the identified variables.

2.5.1 Financial Devolution and Service Delivery

Adam et al. (2012) carried out a study in Europe and America to empirically

examines the relationship between fiscal devolution and public sector efficiency. The

study found that irrespective of whether public sector efficiency concerns education

or health services, an inverted U-shaped relationship exists between government

efficiency in providing these services and fiscal devolution. In contrast, Elhiraika

29
(2016) used data from nine provinces in South Africa to investigate the impact of

fiscal devolution on basic service delivery, focusing on the role of own-source

revenue. The own-source revenue variable was found to have a negative and

significant impact on demand for health relative to demand for other public services.

The researchers argued for increased fiscal devolution and greater revenue

autonomy in particular if sub national governments in South Africa are to improve

service delivery by enhancing transparency and shifting accountability to the local

population rather than the central government.

In a cross country analysis, Diaz-Serrano and Rodrguez-Pose (2012) reported that

the impact of devolution on satisfaction with government, democracy, and the

economic situation of a country is ambiguous. More specifically, they indicate that

fiscal devolution, measured by the expenditure capacity of sub national

governments, exerts a positive influence on satisfaction with political institutions. In

addition they reported that if fiscal devolution is proxied by revenue, the impact is

negative. Consistent to the above are the findings of Balunywa et al. (2014) who

established that fiscal devolution helps to reduce corruption, leads to improved

revenue performance, enables better planning for revenue collection, reduces on tax

evasion, enables the localunit to get more sources of revenue, makes it easy to

handle taxation disputes and also that fiscal devolution reduces on taxation

bureaucracies hence better revenue performance.

Elsewhere, Wei-qing and Shi (2010) undertook an empirical study in China and

revealed that fiscal devolution on expenditure tended to encourage governments to

allocate fiscal expenditure in infrastructure, to attract outside capital to develop local

economy, but in the same time, reduced provision of public services, such as

30
education. The study also found negative effect of fiscal devolution on public

education provision is the highest in Central and West China, and the lowest in

Northeast China. Similarly, Busemeyer (2008) uses a pooled-data of 21 OECD

countries analysis, and finds that fiscal devolution decreases public education

expenditures at national level but increases public education spending at regional

level. In a related study in Europe, Sow and Razafimahefa (2015) concluded that

fiscal devolution improved the efficiency of public service delivery but only under

specific conditions of adequate political and institutional environments and sufficient

degree of decentralized expenditures and revenues. The researchers also noted that

in the absence of those conditions, fiscal devolution can worsen the efficiency of

public service delivery.

In the same context, Ibok (2014) carried a study on local governance and service

delivery and avers that lack of funds occasioned by low budgetary allocation,

restricted revenue sources available to local government and inability to effectively

utilize its internal sources of revenue generation had impacted negatively on the

provision of public goods at local level. For Kenya, Simiyu et al. (2014) using a

descriptive survey design and a sample of 98 respondents carried a case study in

Kimilili to examine effects of devolvedfunding on socio- economic welfare services.

The study measured socio- economic welfare services by literacy level, access to

health facilities, security level, employment level, income levels, water and sanitation

and food security. The researchers revealed that that constituency development

fund plays an important role in social economic aspects of the lives of the locals and

called on policy makers to improve on management of the devolved funds.

31
2.5.2 Political Devolution and Service Delivery

In Indonesia, Sujarwoto (2012) surveyed 8,320 households living in 120 local

governments to investigate the association between political devolution and local

public service performance. The study revealed that effective local political

institutions, better informed citizen and transparency, citizen political participation

via community programs, and the presence of social group in community are

significant for improving local public service performance. Enikolopov and

Zhuravskaya (2016) conducted an empirical study using both cross-section and

panel data from developing and transition countries and find that strong national

parties (a form of political centralization) combined with fiscal devolution significantly

improves government quality measured both in terms of government efficiency,

regulatory quality, control of corruption, and rule of law, and in terms of public good

provision (health and education outcomes).

For Spain , Kyriacou and Roca-Sagale's (2011) using a sample of 101 countries

found a negative impact of political devolution on the relationship between fiscal

devolution and government quality (control of corruption, rule of law, regulatory

quality, and government effectiveness).The researchers concluded that political

devolution, in the form of sub-national elections, bicameralism, and especially

federalism and autonomy, tends to mitigate the positive impact of fiscal devolution

on the quality of government. They observed the findings could be as result of

existence of a regionally elected upper house with the power to block the lower

house's financial legislation which may be preventing improvements in government

performance.

32
In the context of South Africa, Bogopane (2014) carried a study on political

devolution and service delivery based on North West provincial government that

consists of twelve provincial departments and the legislature. The study revealed

lack of a well-established public bureaucracy that bluntly implement government

policies and also involved in putting politicians in check against any form of abuse of

political power. The study also found lack of political structures which led to errors of

judgment which in turn resulted with poor governance and service delivery. In

addition, Lambright (2014) found that partisan politics undermines service delivery in

Kampala in several ways, including financing, tax policy, and even direct interference

in the policies and decisions made by the city council.

Importantly, Nir and Kafle (2013) evaluated the implications of political stability on

educational quality using a sample comprising 47 countries, 26 politically stable and

21 politically unstable during a ten-year period of time (2011-2008).The study

revealed that political stability plays a major role in explaining the survival rate in

education when used as a single predictor or, when introduced in the analysis with

the GDP per capita. In Europe, Diaz-Serrano and Rodriguez-Pose (2014) carried a

study based on analysis of views of 160,000 individuals in 31 European countries

found that political devolution affects citizens satisfaction with education and health

delivery in different ways. The influence of political devolution, however, is highly

contingent on whether the capacity of the local or regional government to exercise

authority over its citizens (self-rule) or to influence policy at the national level

(shared-rule). Similarly, Kumar and Prakash (2012) carried a study in India to

33
investigate the impact of political devolution and gender quota in local governance

on different measures of health outcomes and behaviors. The study found that

political devolution is positively associated with higher probabilities of institutional

births, safe delivery, and births in public health facilities.

2.5.3 Administrative Devolution and Service Delivery

Kosec and Mogues (2015) analyzed the impact that administrative district level

devolution on agricultural and rural service delivery. The study used sample data

from eight districts in seven regions in Ethiopia, 1,899 individuals and 1,117

households. The study found that administrative devolution has led to increased

access to agricultural extension services, and to greater use of modern agricultural

inputs, such as fertilizer and improved seed. Another study in United States,

Saavedra (2010) examined the effects of administrative devolution on access to two

key services: health care and improved drinking water sources. The study provided

evidence supporting positive and significant effects of administrative devolution on

access to health care, and improved water provision. In another study, Mobarak,

Rajkumar, and Cropper (2016) using data from Brazilian municipalities found that

administrative devolution only provides good results when it is accompanied by good

governance.

A study in south Africa by Stanton (2009) explored to what extent the problems of

providing basic services currently experienced by municipalities are influenced by the

administrative configuration of the decentralized system of governance. The study

concluded that local councils have the authority to pass by-laws with respect to the

34
implementation of their legally assigned functions and responsibilities. However,

municipalities had limited autonomy and need provincial approval when contracting

out responsibilities and services. In related study, Bogopane (2014) explored the

impact of perceived erosion of the politics-administration dichotomy on good

governance and service delivery. The study concluded that strong visionary political

and administrative leadership; vibrant apolitical strong public bureaucracy and

integrated political and administrative structures lead to improvement to the

functionality and performance of politics-administration dichotomy relations.

In Ghana, Alornyeku (2011) carried a case study in Kumasi metropolis on

administrative structure and service delivery. The study revealed even though there

is a clear practice of division of labour, there is departments lack of technical

equipment which results in delays in meeting the expectation of citizens .In

addition, assembly low productivity, dueto excessive bureaucracy negatively

impacted performance of the central government. In another study in Nigeria, Boris

(2015)carried an empirical study to examine challenges confronting local

government administration in effective and efficient social service delivery at the

grassroots. Using secondary data, the study concluded lack of funds, corruption, and

undue political interference amongst others as major constraints to local government

service delivery.

2.6 Research Gaps

Majority of previous empirical studies on devolution and service delivery have been

conducted in developed or developing countries of Asia and Latin

America(Kyriacou& Roca-Sagale's, 2011; Weiqing& Shi, 2010). There is relatively

small body of work and attempts to systematically examine the evidence on the

35
impact of devolution on service delivery in Sub-Saharan Africa. Consequently, the

link between devolution and public service delivery in the context of Sub-Saharan

Africa is scarcely explored. Only a limited number of studies have so far examined

the impact of devolution on service delivery in the context of Sub-Saharan Africa

(Balunywa et al., 2014; Tshukudu, 2014).The near absence of research in Africa in

this area raise a question as to whether devolution influences service delivery in

Africa. Empirical findings in developed countries may not be generalized in

developing countries due to different cultural and political context. Further, there is

also the need to test if devolution frameworks, models or theories developed in

western countries are applicable in poor African countries suffering high

unemployment rates. Moreover, it has been argued that peoples attitudes, beliefs

and values vary across countries, cultures and continents. Hence, this study to

bridge the knowledge gap by establishing the impact of devolution on service

delivery in a less developed, non-Western context like the Kenyan context.

Additionally, literature reviewed indicates there is imbalance on the attention that

has gone into studies on devolution and service delivery. In measuring service

delivery, most studies tends to concentrate on service accessibility and disregards

other dimensions of service delivery such as quality of service and citizens

satisfaction (Kosec&Mogues, 2015; Sujarwoto, 2012). Empirical evidence on the links

between devolution and service delivery measured by quality of service and citizen

satisfaction is evidently lacking. One notable exception is a study in India by Nayak

and Samanta (2014) which examined the role of participation in public service

delivery. The researchers used accessibility, availability, reliability and quality of

36
services as a measure of public service delivery. However, the findings of this study

could not be generalized due to different cultural and political contexts. It would

therefore be prudent for other researchers to makea remarkable contribution in this

field by establishing the impact of devolution on service delivery (measured by

accessibility, citizen satisfaction and quality of services).

Moreover, there is need to question the veracity of the link between devolution and

service delivery. Analysis of previous research relating to the question of a link

between devolution and service delivery reveals there is uncertainty as to the

direction of the link. Empirical evidence on the impact of devolution on service

delivery is mixed and inconclusive. A cross section of studies provides evidence that

devolution leads to improved service delivery (Balunywa et al., 2014; Freinkman&

Plekhanov, 2009). In contrast, other studies found that devolution negatively

influences service delivery (Elhiraika, 2016; Olatona&Olomola, 2015). The

inconclusive nature of evidence suggests that more empirical work is required on the

relationship between devolution and service delivery.

Importantly, examination of prior research further reveals that majority of

devolution studies have so far focused on direct link between devolution and service

delivery (Balunywa et al., 2014; Sow &Razafimahefa, 2015). According to Alaaraj

and Ibrahim (2014) e-government influences service delivery, which depicts e-

government as a viable moderator in the relationship between devolution and

service delivery? However, there is limited research on the moderating role of e-

government on the relationship between devolution and service delivery. Locally, the

Constitution of Kenya (2010) shifted government from centralized to decentralized

37
governance. However, empirical literature on the impact of devolution on public

service delivery in Kenya is scant. The available local studies are mainly qualitative

which have only helped to understand the pros and cons of

devolution(Abdumlingo&Mwirigi, 2014; Kobia&Bagaka, 2014).The magnitude of the

impact of devolution on public services delivery in Kenya remains largely non-

quantified. The limited character of research findings in this area suggests that there

is need to further investigate the nature of the relationship between decentralized

governance and service delivery.

38
 CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

The main purpose of this chapter is to describe the research methodology used in

the study. This chapter will deal with the research design, the population of the

study, sample size, sampling procedure, research instruments, validity and reliability

of the instruments, data gathering procedure, data analysis, ethical considerations

and limitations of the study.

3.2 Research Design

Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were adopted in the study. Under the

quantitative approach, the descriptive and correlation designs were utilized. The

study deals with the relationship between variables and testing of hypothesis and

development of generalizations about the sampled population hence the need to use

descriptive correlation design. The qualitative approach includes Key Informant

Interview Guides to selected respondents in the study. This ensures triangulation of

results to provide more evidence.

39
3.3 Research Population

The study targets political leaders and senior administrative staff of Trans Nzoia

County. Research population refers to the entire group of individuals or objects to

which researchers are interested in generalizing the conclusions (Kothari &Garg,

2014; Mugenda&Mugenda, 1999; Mugenda&Mugenda, 2013). In other words,

population is the aggregate of all that conforms to a given specification. All items in

the field of enquiry constitute a population (Kothari, 2014). According to Burns and

Grove (2013) population is all the elements that meet the criteria for inclusion in a

study.

The targeted population was 250 comprising of both administrative and political

leaders in all the Divisions of Trans Nzoia County.

3.4 Sample Size

The sample size was determined using the Slovens formula as stated below.

N
n=
1+ N e 2

250
n=
1+2500.052

n=154 Where N = is the population size, n = is the sample size,

e = is the level of significance (0.05).

Table 1: Sample Size Selection and allocation

Category Target population Sample size
Political leaders from 88 54
Central Division in Trans
Nzoia County
All administrative heads 85 52
from all Divisions of Trans

40
Nzoia County.
CBO heads from all the 77 48
divisions of Trans Nzoia
County.
Total 250 154
Source: Commission on Revenue Allocation (2017) http://kenyacountyguide.com

3.5 Sampling Procedure

The targeted administrative and political leaders were selected purposively by the

researcher based on the seniority. The simple random sampling was used to select

the CBO leaders where by every CBO head has an equal chance of being selected as

a participant.

3.6 Research Instruments

The major data collection tool was the self-administered questionnaire (SAQ). The

questionnaire included three sections. Section A sought to find out the demographic

characteristics of the study sample population while Section B and C included self-

rating questions about devolution and service delivery by the study sample

population respectively. The response modes of the questionnaires in both variables

were; Strongly Agree (SA)=4, Agree (A) =3, Disagree (D)=2 and Strongly disagree

(SD)=1. The interview guide included open ended questions that sought views about

the study variables.

3.7 Validity of Instruments

The validity of a research instrument is the extent to which it measures what it is

supposed to measure, while its reliability is the degree to which it consistently

41
measures whatever it is measuring (Amin, 2015). A pre-test was conducted in order

to test and improve on the validity and reliability of the questionnaire and interview

guide. It was done by administering the questionnaire to 6 potential respondents

who did not participated to the final study.

3.8 Reliability of Instruments

Reliability of the tool was checked and confirmed by subscribing the tool to a

committee of judges; assessments evaluation, educators and special consultants

after giving their opinions and suggestions, the researcher excluded some items and

adjusted some items according to their suggestions until the tool emerged in its final

version.

And the test-retest reliability was applied in the tool where by scorers on the same

test by the same individuals was constant overtime. They provided evidence that

scores obtained on attest at one time (test) were the same or close to the same

when the test was re-administered some other time (retest).

VARIABLE Level of CAC CVI

significance
Political Devolution At 0.05 0.70 0.87
Financial Devolution At 0.05 0.69 0.85
Administrative Devolution At 0.05 0.65 0.84
Service delivery At 0.05 0.71 0.86

42
3.9 Data Gathering Procedure

3.9.1 Before Data Gathering

The researcher obtained an introduction the letter from College of distance post

graduate studies to ease identification in the study area. The researcher also

informed the respondents about the study, its intended purpose

3.9.2. During Data Gathering

The researcher sought authorization of respondents to take part in the study. The

researcher clarified to the respondents the significance of the study and asks them

to take some time to give opinions to the questions in the questionnaire.

3.9.3. After Data Gathering

The questionnaires were retrieved and sorted according to completeness in

answering. This ensured that any missing data that the responds may not give is

taken into consideration during analysis. The questionnaires were then be coded in

the Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) for analysis.

3.11 Data Analysis

In order to present the characteristics of the study sample population, frequency

tables indicating frequency and proportions were used. Objectives 1-3 were analyzed

both using descriptive statistics specifically by generating means and standard

deviations and Pearsons product correlation coefficient test. These were interpreted

based on the developed scale as shown in the proceeding table. All these constructs

43
(financial devolution, Political devolution and Administrative devolution) aim at

establishing the relationship between devolution and service delivery while multiple

regression analysis were used to establish the combined effect of study variables on

the dependent variable. Therefore, regression analysis was carried out to examine

the extent to which study variables (financial devolution, Political devolution and

Administrative devolution) predicted service delivery.

A. Readiness to service delivery

Mean range Response mode Interpretation

3.26-4.00 Strongly agree Very satisfactory
2.51-3.25 Agree Satisfactory
1.76-2.50 Disagree Fair satisfactory
1.00-1.75 Strongly disagree Unsatisfactory

3.12 Ethical Considerations

To ensure confidentiality of the information provided by the respondents and to

ascertain the practice of ethics in this study, the following activities were

implemented by the researcher:

i. The researcher sought permission to adopt the research made questionnaire

on relationship between devolution and service delivery.

ii. The respondents and communities were coded instead of reflecting the

names.

iii. The researcher obtained permission through a written request to the

concerned officials.

iv. The researcher requested the respondents to sign in the Informed Consent

Form

44
 v. The researcher acknowledged the authors quoted in this study through

citations and referencing.

vi. The researcher presented the findings in a generalized manner.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.0 Introduction

In this chapter the researcher presents the analysis and interpretation of the data

based on the study objectives. The study sought to investigate the relationship

between devolution and service delivery in Trans Nzoia County.

4.1 Socio Demographic Characteristics

Table 4.1: Socio economic Characteristics of Respondents

Sex of respondent Frequency Percent

Male 96 62.3
Female 58 37.7
Total 154 100.0
What is your age?
(18-24) years 21 13.6
(25-34) years 46 29.9
(35-44) years 61 39.6
(45 years and above) 26 16.9
Total 154 100.0
What is your level of education?
Primary education 26 16.9
Secondary education 52 33.8
Diploma 45 29.2
Degree 31 20.1
Total 154 100.0
Position in organization
Political leader 55 35.7
Senior administrator 50 32.5
45
NGO leader 49 31.8
Total 154 100.0
How long served in the organization
Less than 10 years 88 57.1
Greater than 10 years 66 42.9
Total 154 100.0
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

Table 4.1 presented the socio economic characteristics of respondents. The study

explored the distribution of gender of respondents, age, the education level, title in

the organization. The study targeted 250 respondents out of which a sample of 154

respondents was selected as a representative sample of the population.

According to the findings of the study, out of the 154 respondents, 96 (62.3%) were

male while the rest 58 (37.7%) were female. This implies that men are dominant

over women among the regional government leadership, that is to say men have a

higher participation ration among Regional government leadership compared to

women.

In terms of age distribution, the findings indicate that most of the respondents 61

(39.6%)were aged between 35-44 years, followed by those aged between 25-43

years that is 46 (29.9%) and those aged 45 years and above 26 (16.9%) while the

rest were aged 24 years and bellow. The distribution indicates that of most of the

respondents among Regional government leadership are still in their active ages

reflecting a good participation ratio in the regional government leadership.

In regard to the education level, the findings indicate 52 (33.8%) of the sample

population had attained secondary education, 45 (29.2%) had attained diplomas and

31 (20.1%) had attained degrees while the rest had attained only primary education.

46
This implies that most of the respondents were knowledgeable about leadership

through which they can be able to improve the service delivery of the regional

government. This offers a competitive advantage for the growth and economic

development of the whole population as a whole.

On the other hand, most of the respondents engage in leadership of local

government are less than ten years in leadership 88 (57.1%) while the rest had

been leading for more than ten years 66 (42.9%). This could be due to the fact that

most of the leaders had been in leadership from previous governments and brought

the experience in the new governments.

4.2 The relationship between devolution and service delivery in Trans

Nzoia County

The three objectives of the study were to investigate relationship between financial

devolution and service delivery, Political devolution and service delivery,

Administrative devolution and service delivery in county governments in Trans Nzoia

County. Descriptive statistics were computed in terms of means, standard deviations

and ranks. The mean represented the devolution (financial, political, administrative)

and service delivery; the standard deviation reflected the level of the dispersion of

readiness around the mean while the ranks explained the frequently ranked item

among the respondents. The findings are presented in Tables as follow:

Table 4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics on financial devolution

Financial devolution (N=154) Mea Std. Ran Interpretatio

n Dev. k n

47
The county government has sufficient 3.36 .602 1 High
power to decide on howto raise
revenue
The county government meet the 3.32 .685 2 High
budget for locally generatedrevenue in
the last financial year
The county government has the 3.31 .686 3 High
administrative authority to set the rates
andcharges for devolved services
The county government has significant 3.30 .681 4 High
power to decide on
how to spent the county revenue
The county government borrows loans 2.88 1.068 5 High
from nationalgovernment
The national government consults with 2.67 1.036 6 High
county government onnew taxes
affecting counties
Overall mean 3.06 0.85 High
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

As indicated in Table 4.2.2, the descriptive statistics on financial devolution indicate

that most of the respondents agreed with all the items that were examined. The first

ranked item was that The county government has sufficient power to decide on

howto raise revenue (mean=3.36, Std. Dev. =.602 and Rank=1). The mean was

interpreted as high while the standard deviation is also comparably lower. Secondly,

most of the respondents agreed with the fact that The county government meet the

budget for locally generatedrevenue in the last financial year (Mean=3.32, Std.

Dev. =.685 and Rank=1). The item mean was also interpreted as high.

The third ranked item was "The county government has the administrative authority

to set the rates andcharges for devolved services" (Mean=3.31, Std. Dev. =.686 and

Rank=3). The least ranked item is The national government consults with county

government onnew taxes affecting counties" (Mean=2.67, Std. Dev. =1.036 and

48
Rank=6). The overall mean 3.06 implies that financial devolution in regional

governments is high.

Table 4.2.2 Descriptive Statistics on political devolution

Political devolution (N=154) Mea Std. Ran Interpretati

n Dev. k on
The county assembly has power to 3.16 .874 1 High
pass laws relating tocounty
governance
There was political competition on all 2.99 .960 2 High
elective posts duringthe last general
election
2.76 1.19 3 High
The county government respects civil
liberties and humanrights 4
2.54 1.16 4 High
Most political parties are active and
have party offices inyour county 1
Your county government has effective 2.54 1.16 4 High
input in nationalpolicy making
processes on devolution 1
The county government has full 2.54 1.16 4 High
autonomy to formulate localpolicies
1
Overall mean 2.86 1.047 High
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

According to the findings in Table 4.2.1, at the mean (Mean=3.16, Std. Dev. =.874

and Rank=1), most of the respondents agreed with the item that The county

assembly has power to pass laws relating tocounty governance. This item was

interpreted as high implying that respondents agreed that the regional government

has political powers. More so the second rated item was that There was political

competition on all elective posts duringthe last general election. This item was also

interpreted as high. At the mean level of (mean=2.99, Std. Dev. =.960 and rank=2),

the respondents believe that their political destiny depends on themselves.

49
Furthermore, the respondents also agreed that the county government respects civil

liberties and humanrights (Mean=2.76, Std. Dev. =1.194 and Rank=3) while the

least ranked item was that Most political parties are active and have party offices

inyour county" (Mean=2.54, Std. Dev. =1.161). This item was also ranked high. The

overall mean of 2.86 is also high. This implies that political devolution of county

government is high.

Table 4.2.3 Descriptive Statistics on administrative devolution

Administrative devolution Mea Std. Ran Interpretatio
n Dev. k n
The county government has adequate 3.25 .829 1 High
autonomy to contractservices without
direction from the national government
The county government has autonomy 3.21 .853 2 High
to hire newemployees
The county government has autonomy 2.95 1.012 3 High
to fire countyemployees
The county government has power to 2.95 1.012 3 High
sign employmentcontracts with county
employees
Your county government is responsible 2.95 1.012 3 High
for economicempowerment of the
residents
Overall mean 3.14 0.898 High
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)
As revealed by the findings in Table 4.2.3, most of the respondents agreed with

most of the items that were examined. The first ranked item was that The county

government has adequate administrative autonomy to contractservices without

direction from the national government (mean=3.25, Std. Dev. =.829 and

Rank=1). The mean was interpreted high. Secondly the respondents highly agreed

with the item The county government has administrative autonomy to hire

newemployees (Mean=3.21, Std. Dev. =.853 and Rank=2). At a mean of

(Mean=2.95, Std. Dev. =1.012 and Rank=3), the respondents agreed that"The

50
county government has administrative autonomy to fire countyemployees". The

overall mean (Mean=3.14) is also interpreted as high implying that the belief

availability of administrative devolution powers is satisfactory.

Descriptive Statistics on the Level of Service delivery

The study also examined the level of service delivery. In an attempt to answer this

question, five items were examined based on means, standard deviations and ranks.

Table 4.2.4 Descriptive Statistics on the Level of Service delivery

Service delivery Mea Std Ran Interpretatio

n . k n

Dev

.
In the last three years, the quality of 3.58 .521 1 High
sewer services rendered by your
county government has greatly
improved.
In your opinion, the county 3.53 .538 2 High
government provides sewer service in
satisfactory manner
In your own town, you rarely 3.51 .551 3 High
experience sewage pipe bursts and
blockages
In the last three years, many 3.37 .676 4 High
households in your town has been
connected the sewer line
In the last 3 years, the quality of 3.12 .536 5 High
most county roads has greatly
improved
Overall Average 3.42 High

2
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

51
In Table 4.2.4 the study examined the level of service delivery. The respondents

agreed with most of the items that were examined. The first ranked item was that

In the last three years, the quality of sewer services rendered by your county

government has greatly improved (Mean=3.58, Std. Dev. =0.521 and Rank=1).

The mean was interpreted as high. The second ranked item was that In your

opinion, the county government provides sewer service in satisfactory manner

(Mean =3.53, Std. Dev. =.538 and Rank=2). This item was also interpreted as high.

The last ranked item was that In the last 3 years, the quality of most county roads

has greatly improved (Mean=3.12, Std. Dev. =.536 and Rank =5). This item was

also interpreted as high. The overall mean=3.422 was also interpreted as high

implying that the level of county government service delivery was satisfactory. This

also indicates that respondentsare satisfied with county government service delivery.

4.3 Relationship between financial devolution and service delivery in

county governmentsin Trans Nzoia County.

The first objective of the study aimed at establishing the relationship between

financial devolution and service delivery in county governments in Trans Nzoia

County. The Pearsons Correlation Co-efficient was computed to answer the

objective of the study.

Table 4.3 Pearsons Correlation Coefficient statistic for the relationship

between financial devolution and service delivery in county governments

Financial devolution Service delivery

Pearson Correlation .791**
Sig. (2-tailed) .001

52
 N 154
**
Correlation is significant 0.01 and 0.05 level of significance
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

As indicated in Table 4.3, the Pearsons correlation coefficient r=0.791 and the

significance value (Sig. =0.001). The correlation value is positive and close to one

while the significance value is less than 0.05. This implies that there is a significant

positive correlation between financial devolution and service delivery. This is also

supported by the findings in Table 4.2.2 on financial devolution. Financial devolution

was found high. An indication that service delivery greatly depends on the strength

of the financial devolution of Regional government.

4.4 Relationship between Political devolution and service delivery in Trans

Nzoia County

The second objective of the study encompassed establishing the relationship

between Political devolution and service delivery in Trans Nzoia County. In a similar

way, the Pearsons Correlation Co-efficient was computed to generate the answer to

this objective. The findings are presented in Table 4.4

Table 4.4 Pearsons Correlation Coefficient statistic for the relationship

between Political devolution and service delivery

Political devolution Service delivery

Pearson Correlation .770**
Sig. (2-tailed) .003
N 154
**
Correlation is significant 0.01 and 0.05 level of significance
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

53
As indicated in Table 4.4, the Pearsons correlation coefficient statistic r=0.770 and

the significance value (sig. =0.003). The statistic (r) is positive while the significance

value is less than 0.05. This implies that there is a significant positive relationship

between political devolution and service delivery among Regional governments. This

is also supported by the findings in Table 4.2.1 where political devolution was high.

Overall political devolution was satisfactory according to the findings in Table 4.2.1.

4.5 Relationship between Administrative devolution and service delivery

in Trans Nzoia County.

The study further explored the relationship between Administrative devolution and

service delivery in Trans Nzoia County.

Table 4.5 Pearsons correlation coefficient between Administrative

devolution and service delivery

Administrative Service delivery

Pearson Correlation .630**
devolution Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 154
**
Correlation is significant 0.01 and 0.05 level of significance
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

As indicated in Table 4.5, the Pearsons correlation coefficient statistic (r) is r=0.630

and the significance value is (Sig. =0.000). The statistic r is less than 0.05 while the

Pearsons correlation coefficient is positive. This implies that there is a significant

positive correlation between administrative devolution and service delivery among

respondents of Regional governments. In other words, when administrative

54
devolution is present, the likelihood of services delivery increases and reduces with

lower administrative devolution.

4.6: Relationship between Financial devolution, political devolution,

administrative devolution and service delivery.

The study also examined the overall relationship between Financial devolution,

political devolution, administrative devolution and service delivery. The multiple

linear regression analysis was conducted and the interpretation of the results was

based on the standardized coefficients, the t-statistics and significance valves.

Table 4.6 Regression analysis: Relationship between Financial devolution,

political devolution, administrative devolution and level of service delivery

Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.

Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 15.679 1.437 10.91 .000
2
Financial .886 .067 .701 4.017 .000
Political .792 .057 .651 3.621 .001
Administrative .675 .054 .631 2.445 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Service delivery
b. Independent Variables: Financial, Political And Administrative
Source: Researchers Computation from Primary Data (2017)

Table 4.6 presents a summary of the findings on the relationship between Financial

devolution and service delivery. Using the standardized coefficients, the coefficient

for Financial devolution (=0.701, t=4.017 and Sig. =0.000). The coefficient is

positive and the significance level (Sig. =0.000) is less than 0.05 implying that

Financial devolution has a significant positive relation with service delivery. This is

55
also confirms the findings in Table 4.3. The coefficient also implies that Financial

devolution influences service delivery by 70.1%.

Furthermore, the standardized coefficient for Political devolution (=0.651, t=3.621

and Sig. =0.001). The coefficient is positive while the significance value is also less

than 0.05; we therefore observe that political devolution has a significant

relationship with service delivery. The coefficient =0.651 implies that

politicaldevolution accounts for 65.1% of the variation in service delivery among

respondents of selected Regional government leadership.

Also, the findings indicate that administrative devolution has a significant

relationship with adoption of county government(=0.631, t=2.445 and Sig.

=0.000). The coefficient =0.541 implies that administrative devolution accounts

for 63.1% of the variation in service delivery by respondents among Regional

government leadership.

Hypotheses Testing

The first stated null hypothesis of the current study was that there is no significant

relationship between financial devolution and service delivery incounty governments

in Trans Nzoia County. Basing on the correlation findings in table 4.3 the significance

value (Sig. =0.001) implies that we reject the above stated null hypothesis and

conclude that there is a significant relationship between Financial devolution and the

level of service delivery among Regional government leadership in Trans Nzoia

County.

56
The second and third stated hypotheses were that there is no significant relationship

between devolutionand service deliveryin Trans Nzoia County. In both hypotheses,

since the findings in table 4.3 showed a significance value of (sig. =0.003) and table

4.4 indicated a significance value of (sig. =0.003), the study rejects the null

hypotheses stated above respectively. Therefore, in both the second and third

hypotheses, the study concludes that there a significant relationship between

devolutionand service deliveryin Trans Nzoia County.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the discussion, the conclusion drawn from the study,

recommendations and areas for further study.

5.1 Discussion

The discussion of the findings was presented in line with the objectives of the study.

The study specifically aimed at establishing the impact of devolution on service

delivery:(i) the relationship between Financial devolution and service delivery; (ii)

the relationship between political devolution and service delivery and (iii) the

relationship between administrative devolution and service delivery.

57
5.1.1 Relationshipbetween Financial devolution and service delivery

The first objective of the study was to establish whether financial devolution

influences service delivery in county governments in Kenya. From this objective, it

was hypothesized that there is no relationship between financial devolution and

service delivery in county governments in Kenya. The results of this study showed a

positive statistically significant relationship between financial devolution and service

delivery in county governments in Kenya .Therefore, hypothesis H1: there is no

significant relationship between financial devolution and service delivery in county

governments in Kenya was rejected and concluded that financial devolution has a

significant effect on service delivery. The findings therefore confirmed that financial

devolution is a determinant of service delivery in county governments in Kenya. It is

notable that the relationship at this stage was not as strong as expected. The

researcher attributes this to the fact that devolution in Kenya is still young and we

are at initial stage of implementation of county governments in Kenya.

Elsewhere, Weiqing and Shi (2010) undertook an empirical study in China and

revealed that fiscal devolution on expenditure tended to encourage governments to

allocate fiscal expenditure in infrastructure, to attract outside capital to develop local

economy, but in the same time, reduced provision of public services, such as

education. The study also found negative effect of fiscal devolution on public

education provision is the highest in Central and West China, and the lowest in

Northeast China. Similarly, Busemeyer (2008) uses a pooled-data of 21 OECD

countries analysis, and finds that fiscal devolution decreases public education

expenditures at national level but increases public education spending at regional

58
level. In a related study in Europe, Sow and Razafimahefa (2015) concluded that

fiscal devolution improved the efficiency of public service delivery but only under

specific conditions of adequate political and institutional environments and sufficient

degree of decentralized expenditures and revenues. The researchers also noted that

in the absence of those conditions, fiscal devolution can worsen the efficiency of

public service delivery.

In the same context, Ibok (2014) carried a study on local governance and service

delivery and avers that lack of funds occasioned by low budgetary allocation,

restricted revenue sources available to local government and inability to effectively

utilize its internal sources of revenue generation had impacted negatively on the

provision of public goods at local level. For Kenya, Simiyu et al. (2014) using a

descriptive survey design and a sample of 98 respondents carried a case study in

Kimilili to examine effects of devolved funding on socio- economic welfare services.

The study measured socio- economic welfare services by literacy level, access to

health facilities, security level, employment level, income levels, water and sanitation

and food security. The researchers revealed that that constituency development

fund plays an important role in social economic aspects of the lives of the locals and

called on policy makers to improve on management of the devolved funds.

5.1.2 Relationshipbetween political devolution and service delivery

The second research question of the study was to establish if there is a significant

relationship between political devolution and service delivery. The study findings

established that there is a significant positive correlation between political devolution

and service delivery. According to Sujarwoto (2012) surveyed 8,320 households

living in 120 local governments to investigate the association between political

59
devolution and local public service performance. The study revealed that effective

local political institutions, better informed citizen and transparency, citizen political

participation via community programs, and the presence of social group in

community are significant for improving local public service performance. Enikolopov

and Zhuravskaya (2016) conducted an empirical study using both cross-section and

panel data from developing and transition countries and find that strong national

parties (a form of political centralization) combined with fiscal devolution significantly

improves government quality measured both in terms of government efficiency,

regulatory quality, control of corruption, and rule of law, and in terms of public good

provision (health and education outcomes).

For Spain , Kyriacou and Roca-Sagale's (2011) using a sample of 101 countries

found a negative impact of political devolution on the relationship between fiscal

devolution and government quality (control of corruption, rule of law, regulatory

quality, and government effectiveness).The researchers concluded that political

devolution, in the form of sub-national elections, bicameralism, and especially

federalism and autonomy, tends to mitigate the positive impact of fiscal devolution

on the quality of government. They observed the findings could be as result of

existence of a regionally elected upper house with the power to block the lower

house's financial legislation which may be preventing improvements in government

performance.

60
5.1.3 Relationship between administrative devolution and service delivery

The study also sought the relationship between administrative devolution and

service delivery. The current study established that there is a significant positive

correlation between administrative devolution and service delivery.

The same findings in the current study are supported by previous studies. For

example in a study of Kosec and Mogues (2015), they analyzed the impact that

administrative district level devolution on agricultural and rural service delivery. The

study used sample data from eight districts in seven regions in Ethiopia, 1,899

individuals and 1,117 households. The study found that administrative devolution

has led to increased access to agricultural extension services, and to greater use of

modern agricultural inputs, such as fertilizer and improved seed. Another study in

United States, Saavedra (2010) examined the effects of administrative devolution on

access to two key services: health care and improved drinking water sources. The

study provided evidence supporting positive and significant effects of administrative

devolution on access to health care, and improved water provision. In another study,

Mobarak, Rajkumar, and Cropper (2016) using data from Brazilian municipalities

found that administrative devolution only provides good results when it is

accompanied by good governance.

In a separate study Alornyeku (2011) carried a case study in Kumasi metropolis on

administrative structure and service delivery. The study revealed even though there

is a clear practice of division of labour, there is departments lack of technical

61
equipment which results in delays in meeting the expectation of citizens .In

addition, assembly low productivity, due to excessive bureaucracy negatively

impacted performance of the central government. In another study in Nigeria, Boris

(2015)carried an empirical study to examine challenges confronting local

government administration in effective and efficient social service delivery at the

grassroots. Using secondary data, the study concluded lack of funds, corruption, and

undue political interference amongst others as major constraints to local government

service delivery.

5.2 Conclusion

5.2.1 Relationship between Financial devolution and service delivery.

The findings confirm that there is a statistically significant influence of financial

devolution on service delivery in county governments in Kenya. A positive increase in

financial devolution leads to an increase in service delivery in county governments in

Kenya. It can be concluded from this study that financial devolution was statistically

significant in explaining service delivery in county governments in Kenya.

5.2.2 Relationship between Political devolution and service delivery

The current study was also set to investigate the relationship between Political

devolution and service delivery. Based on the Pearsons correlation coefficient

statistic r=0.770 and the significance value (sig. =0.003), this study concludes that

there is positive significance relationship between political devolution and services

delivery in Regional governments. This conclusion is supported by the findings in

Table 4.2.1 where the mean value of level of political devolution was found to be

62
high. In a nutshell, the political devolution was satisfactory according to the

respondents.

5.2.3 Relationship between administrative devolution and service delivery

On the relationship between administrative devolution and adoption, the study

based on the findings of Pearsons correlation coefficient statistic (r) is r=0.630 and

the significance value is (Sig. =0.000) to conclude that there is a significant positive

correlation between administrative devolution and service delivery among

respondents of Regional governments. This implication for this is that when

administrative devolution increases, the likelihood of service delivery increases.

5.3 Recommendation

5.3.1 Relationship between Financial devolution and service delivery

The study found that financial devolution has a positive statically significant

relationship on service delivery in county governments in Kenya. The study

recommends that national and county should put in place a set of deliberate and

proactive processes, policies and structures that support financial devolution. The

national government should review existing policy on financial devolution with a view

of increasing funding to counties. Additionally, the study recommends that the

national government should come up with strategic interventions to promote

financial devolution to enhance service delivery to the citizens. Further, the study

recommends that central government, (executive and parliament) should appreciate

63
the strategic philosophy of financial devolution by restraining their line ministries

from interfering in the management of decentralized services. This will eliminate

conflict between the national government and county governments.

5.2.2 Relationship between Political devolution and service delivery

It has been established that there exists a positive significant relationship between

political devolution and service delivery in county governments in Kenya. The study

thus recommends that national and county governments to should put in place

measures to safeguard the independence of political devolution. The study further

recommends that the members of county assembly use the finding of this study to

better align or revise the existing county legal framework, to promote service

delivery in the counties. This study also recommends that national government

enhance political devolution (legislative powers, political competition and civil

liberties) to counties in order to promote service delivery to counties.

5.2.3 Relationship between administrative devolution and service delivery

Further, given that the finding of the study confirmed that administrative devolution

influences service delivery, the study recommends that the government should

increase county government autonomy to promote administrative devolution.

Specifically, the national government should grant county government greater

autonomy to contractservices at county level, hire and fire county employees, sign

employment contracts and increase expertise of county employees. Additionally, the

64
national government should make it easier for county governments to exercise

administrative power over county contractors, employees and suppliers.

5.4 Areas for further study

This study restricted itself to three devolution variables (financial devolution, political

devolution and administrative devolution) which were not exhaustive in investigating

theeffect of governance devolution on service delivery. Further empirical work could

be conducted to expose other governance variables such as voice and accountability,

political stability, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, rule of law and

control of corruption which may influence service delivery in county governments in

Kenya.

In addition, this study examined the link between devolution and service delivery

based on data from a single country. While this approach has the advantage of

presenting a more focused and detailed view, it does not help to provide

international comparisons and cross-country empirical evidence. Hence, this study

suggests that future authors extend the sampling to other countries and the

duration of study to enable international comparisons and cross-country empirical

evidence.

5.5 Contribution of the Study

In the course of analyzing the research findings some unexpected issue emerged

that has implications for the wider body of knowledge. After scrutinizing the Kenyan

devolution literature there was scanty of evidence that link devolution and service

delivery. This gap in literature suggests that the research has made a significant

65
contribution to the body of knowledge. The study will assist intellectuals and be a

reference for future studies and practitioners undertakings on link governance

devolution variables and service delivery. The findings of the study added to the

theoretical literature on the governance devolution and service delivery as the study

proposed optimal model of the relationship between governance devolution and

service delivery. This study has made useful contribution to the advancement of

academic knowledge on devolution from the context of Sub-Saharan African setting

and particularly to county governments in Kenya.

REFERENCES

Abdumlingo, H., &Mwirigi, M. F. (2014). Challenges of managing devolved funds in

the delivery of services: A case study of Mombasa county. International
journal ofresearch in commerce & management, 5 (5), 1-4.

Abe, T., &Monisola, O. J. (2014). Citizen Participation and Service Delivery at the
Local Government Level: A Case of Ise/Orun Local Government InEkiti State,
Nigeria. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 27, 102-110.

Adam, A., Delis, M. D., &Kammas, P. (2012). Fiscal devolution and public sector
efficiency: Evidence from OECD countries. Munich Personal RePEc Archive.

Ahmad, J., Devarajan, S., Khemani, S., & Shah, S. (2015). Devolution and
ServiceDelivery.Policy Research Working Paper 3603.The World Bank:
Washington,D.C.

66
Ahmad , E., Brosio, G., &Tanzi, V. (2008). Local service provision in selected OECD
countries: Do decentralized operations work better? . Working Paper , No.
08/67. Washington, D.C: International Monetary Fund.

Banerjee, A. V., Banerji, R., Duflo, E., Glennerster, R., &Khemani, S. (2010). Pitfalls
of participatory programs: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in
education in India. American Economic Journal, 2(1), 1-30.

Banker, R. D., & Patton, J. M. (1987). Analytical agency theory and municipal
accounting: An introduction and an application. Research in Governmental
andNon Profit Accounting, 3, 29-50.

Barker, A. E. (2016). New public management in developing countries: An analysis

of success and failure with particular reference to Singapore and Bangladesh.
International . Journal of Public Sector Management., 19, 180-203.

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in

social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic,and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.

Busemeyer, M. R. (2008). The Impact of Fiscal Devolution on Education and Other

Types of Spending.Swiss Political Science Review, 14(3), 451-481.

Bwalya, K. e. a. (2012). E-government and technological utopianism: exploring

Zambias challenges and opportunities. Electronic Journal of e-Government,
10(1), 16-30.

Carlson, C., Lamalle , J., Fustukian, S., Katy, N., Sibbons, M., &Sondorp, E. (2015).
Improving the Delivery of Health and Education Services in Difficult
Environments: Lessons from Case Studies, London: DFID Health Systems
Resource Centre.

Chatfield, A., &Alhujran, O. (2016). An analysis of e-government maturity models

from a user centric perspective: Toward a public value proposition.
Proceedings ofEEE07 - The 2016 International Conference on e-Learning, e-
Business, Enterprise Information Systems, and e-Government, wMonte Carlo
Resort, Las Vegas, Nevada, June 2528, 2016.

67
Chatfield, A. T., &Alhujran, O. (2009).A Cross-Country Comparative Analysis of E-
Government Service Delivery among Arab Countries. Information Technology
forDevelopment, 15(3), 151170.

Churchill, G. A., & Brown, T. J. (2014). Basic Marketing Research, Ohio: Thompson
Corporation.

Dasgupta, A., &Victoria, A. B. (2016).Community Driven Development, Collective

Action and Elite Capture in Indonesia.Dev. Change, 38(2), 229-249.

Davis, J. H., Donaldson, L., &Schoorman, F. D. (1997 ). Toward a stewardship

theory of management.Academy of Management Review, 22, 2047.

Dawson, C. (2012). Practical Research Methods: A user friendly guide to research ,

Newtec Place, United Kingdom: How To Books Ltd, 3.

De Vaus, D. A. (2012).Surveys in Social research. (5th ed.). London: Routledge.

Dixon, J. (2013). Responses to Governance. The Governing of Corporations,

Societiesand the World, Westport: Praeger.

Donald, R. C., & Pamela, S. S. (2001). Business Research Methods. (Seventh

Edition.), New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Eigema,J. (2016). Service Delivery, a Challenge for Local Governments, VNG

International, Retrieved from www.vng-international.nl.

Ekpo, A. H. (2008). Devolution And Service Delivery: A Framework ., Nairobi African

Economic Research Consortium (AERC).

Elhiraika, A. B. (2016). Fiscal devolution and Public service Delivery in South Africa.
WIP 58.African Trade Policy Centre.

Elsageer, A., &Mbwambo, J. (2014). Does Devolution Have a Positive Impact on the
Use of Natural Resources? A Paper for Interdisciplinary Course,
InternationalDoctoral Studies at University of Bonn.

Emory, C. W., & Cooper, D. R. (2013). Business Research Methods. Illinois: Richard
D.IrwinInc.

68
Enikolopov, R., &Zhuravskaya, E. (2016).Devolution and political institutions. Journal
of Public Economics, 91, 2261-2290.

Falleti , T. G. (2014). A Sequential Theory of Devolution and Its Effects on the

Intergovernmental Balance of Power: Latin American Cases in Comparative
Perspective. working paper, 314.

Falleti, T. G. (2015). A sequential theory of decentralisation: Latin American cases in

comparative perspective. The American Political Science Review, 99(3), 327-
346.

Farooq, M. K., Shamail, S., &Awais, M. M. (2008). Devolution in a Virtual Enterprise. IFIP
International Federation for Information Processing, 283, 433440.

Faust, J., & Barbers, I. (2012).On the local politics of administrative devolution:
applying for policy responsibilities in ecuador. Publius: J. Federalism, 42, 52-
77.

Feizy, T., Moghali, A., Gramipour, M., &Zare, R. (2015). A Mixed Method Research
for Finding A Model of Administrative Devolution. International Journal
ofAsian Social Science, 5(8), 478-502.

Gailmard, S. (2012).Accountability and principal-agent models. Chapter prepared for

theOxford Handbook of Public Accountability . Oxford: Oxford.

Garca-Snchez, I.-M., Rodrguez-Domnguez, L., & Frias-Aceituno,

J.-V. (2013).

Gaventa, J., & Barrett, G. (2010). So What Difference Does it Make? Mapping the
Outcomes of Citizen Engagemen. t. IDS Working Paper 348. Brighton:
Instituteof Development Studies.

Gemmell, N., Kneller, R., &Sanz, I. (2013). Fiscal decentralisation and economic
growth: Spending versus revenue decentralisation.Economic Inquiry, 51(4),
1915-1931.

Ghauri, P. N., &Grnhaug, K. (2012). Research methods in business studies: a

practicalguide. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

69
Halaskova, M., &Halaskova, R. (2014).Impacts of decentralisation on the local
government expenditures and public services in the EU
countries.LexLocalisJournal of Local Self-Government, 12(3), 623-642.

Hasnain, Z. (2008). The Politics of Service Delivery in Pakistan:Political Parties and

the Incentives for Patronage, 1988-1999. The Pakistan Development Review,
47(2), 129151.

Hasnain, Z. (2010). Devolution, Accountability, and Service Delivery in Pakistan The

Pakistan Development Review, 49(2), 129-152.

Heenetigala, K. (2011). Corporate Governance Practices and Firm Performance of

ListedCompanies in Sri Lanka.Unpublished PhD Thesis, Melbourne:
VictoriaUniversity .

Joshi, A., &Houtzager, P. P. (2012).Widgets or Watchdogs? Public Management

Review,14(2), 145-162.

Kaboolian, L. (2011). The new public management: Challenging the boundaries of

the management vs. administration debate. . Public Admin. Rev., 58, 189-
193.

Kaisara, G., &Pather, S. (2011). The eGovernment evaluation challenge: A South

Africa Batho Pelealigned service quality approach. Government Information
Quarterly,28, 211221.

Kamara, S., Ofori-Owusu, D., &Sesay, L. F. (2012).Governance,Accountability and

Effective Basic Services Delivery in Sierra Leone. Centre for Economic and
SocialPolicy Analysis (CESPA).

Lindley, P., &Walker, S. N. (2013).Theoretical and methodological differentiation of

moderation and mediation.Nursing Research, 42, 276279.

Lobao, L., Martin, R., &Rodrigeuz-Pose, A. (2009).Editorial:rescaling the state new

modes of institutional-territorial organisation Cambridge Journal of
Regions,Economies and Societies, 2, 3-12.

70
Macharia, P. K., Wambua, L., &Mwangulu, J. (2014). A Study To Assess The
Influence Of Citizen Participation On Decentralized Service Delivery, A Case
Study Of Kipipiri Constituency, Nyandarua County. International Journal of
SocialSciences Management and Entrepreneurship, 1(2), 85-105.

Mackinnon, D. (2015). Devolution, state restructuring and policy divergence in the

UK.The Geographical Journal, 181(1), 4756.

Maizura, H., Masilamani, R., &Aris, T. (2009).Reliability (Internal Consistency) of the

job content questionnaire on job stress among office workers of a
Multinational company in Kuala Lumpur. Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Health,
21(2), 216-222.

Masanyiwa, Z. S., Niehof, A., &Termeer, C. J. A. M. (2012). Institutional

arrangements for decentralized water and health services delivery in rural
Tanzania: differences and constraints. Basic Research Journal of Social and
Political Sciences, 1(4).

Nurunnabi, M., & Islam, S. K. (2012). Accountability in the Bangladeshi privatized

healthcare sector. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance,
25(7), 625-644.

Obicci, P. A. (2014). Political Devolution and Service Delivery: Evidence from Agago
District, Uganda. The Ugandan Journal of Management and Public
PolicyStudies, 8(1), 1-14.

Olatona, J. B., &Olomola, P. A. (2015).Analysis of Fiscal Devolution and Public

Service Delivery in Nigeria.Journal of Economics and Sustainable
Development,6(9).

Syamsuddin, I. (2011). Evaluation of e-government initiatives in developing

countries: An ITPOSMO approach. International Research Journal of Applied
and BasicScience.

Tembo, F. (2012). Citizen Voice and State Accountability: Towards theories of

change that embrace contextual dynamics. London: Overseas Development
Institute.

71
Tolofari, S. (2015).New Public Management and Education Policy.Futures in
Education,3(1).

Transparency International.(2014). A national opinion poll on devolution and

governance in Kenya.

Triesman,D. (2016). The Architecture of Government.Rethinking PoliticalDevolution,

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

World Bank, (2013).World development report 2014: Making services work for the
poorpeople. Washington DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press.

World Bank. (2008). Local Government Discretion and Accountability: A Local

Governance Framework. Economic and Sector Work Report No.
40153.Washington, D.C.

Yusoff,M. A., Sarjoon, A., Awang, A., &Efendi, D. (2016).Conceptualizing Devolution

and its Dimensions.International Business Management, 10(6), 692-701.

Zikmund, G. W., Babin, B. J., Carr, C. J., & Griffin, M. (2010). Business
ResearchMethods 8 th ed. South-Western : Cengage Learning.

Zimmerman, J. L. (1977). The municipal accounting maze: An analysis of political

incentives. Journal of Accounting Research, 15, 107-144.

72
 APPENDIX I

Introduction Letter

73
 APPENDIX II

SELF ADMINISTERED QUESTIONNAIRE (SAQ)

THIS QUESTIONNAIRE IS ABOUT DEVOLUTION AND SERVICE DELIVERY IN TRANS

NZOIA COUNTY

Dear respondent,

I am conducting a study on devolution and service delivery in Trans Nzoia County.

The study is mainly for academic purpose and you have been randomly selected to

participate by completing the questionnaire. Your responses will be treated with

confidentiality and the findings will be presented in a generalized manner.

I am a student of Kampala International University (KIU). My name is Wafula Davis

Registration Number: MPA -D/46/151/DF

Thank you

74
Part A: Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

Please select the best option that suits the right information about you

1. Gender (Please tick appropriately)

a) Male

b) Female

2. In what age bracket do you fall? (Circle where appropriate)

a) 18-25

b) 26-35

c) 36-45

d) 46-55

e) 56+

3. Marital Status

a) Single

b) Married

c) Divorced

d) Widow

e) Widower

f) Separated

4. What is your highest level of education?

a) Certificate/Diploma

b) Bachelor

c) Masters

75
 d) PhD

e) Other (Specify)...

5. What Status/ position do you currently hold in the administration that you work

for?

a) Manager /Administrator

b) Staff/volunteer

c) Other

6. For how long have you served in your organization?

a. 1-3 years

b. 4-6 years

c. 7-10 years

d. 10+ years

SECTION B: INDEPENDENT VARIABLE (DEVOLUTION)

In this section you are requested to give your response based on the given scale in

reference to your readiness. 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Undecided

4=Agree, 5=strongly agree.

76
 Section I: Financial devolution
1. Please circle the most appropriate option on the right hand side of the
questions;
Strongly Agree (1)

Agree (2)

Undecided (3)
Disagree (4)

Strongly Disagree (5)

1 2 3 4 5

MISS1 The county government has sufficient power to decide on how

to raise revenue
MISS2 The county government meet the budget for locally generated

revenue in the last financial year

MISS3 The county government has the authority to set the rates and

charges for devolved services

MISS4 The county government has significant power to decide on

how to spent the county revenue

MISS5 The county government borrows loans from national

government
MISS6 The national government consults with county government on

new taxes affecting counties

MISS7 The county government has the authority to incur debt

Section II: Political Devolution

1. Please circle the most appropriate option on the right hand side of the
questions;

77
 Strongly Agree (1)

Agree (2)

Undecided (3)

Disagree (4)

Strongly Disagree (5)

1 2 3 4 5

VIS 1 The county assembly has power to pass laws relating to

county governance
VIS 2 There was political competition on all elective posts during
the last general election
VIS 3 The county government respects civil liberties and human

Rights
VIS 4 Most political parties are active and have party offices in

your county
VIS 5 Your county government has effective input in national

policy making processes on devolution

The county government has full autonomy to formulate local
VIS 6
policies
VIS 7 The county governor is elected by popular vote
VIS 8 The county executive committee are nominated by governors but
approved through popular vote by county assembly

Section III: Administrative Devolution

1. Please circle the most appropriate option on the right hand side of the
questions;
Strongly Agree (1)

Agree (2)

78
 Undecided (3)

Disagree (4)

Strongly Disagree (5)

1 2 3 4 5

CONS 1 The county government has adequate autonomy to contract

services without direction from the national government

CONS 2 The county government has autonomy to hire new

employees
CONS 3 The county government has autonomy to fire county

employees
CONS 4 The county government has power to sign employment

contracts with county employees

CONS 5 Your county government is responsible for economic

empowerment of the residents

CONS 6 The county assembly has adequate power to make county

by-laws
CONS 7 The county government usually has freedom to forge
public-private partnerships to speed up development in
your county

SECTION C: DEPENDENT VARIABLE (SERVICE DELIVERY)

In this section you are requested to give your response based on the given scale in

reference to your readiness. 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Undecided

4=Agree, 5=strongly agree.

79
 1. Please circle the most appropriate option on the right hand side of the
questions;
Strongly Agree (1)

Agree (2)

Undecided (3)

Disagree (4)

Strongly Disagree (5)

1 2 3 4 5

SOLV 1 In the last three years, the quality of sewer services rendered by
your county government has greatly improved.
SOLV 2 In your opinion, the county government provides sewer service in
satisfactory manner
SOLV 3 In your own town, you rarely experience sewage pipe bursts and
blockages
SOLV 4 In the last three years, many households in your town has been
connected the sewer line
SOLV 5 In the last 3 years, the quality of most county roads has greatly
improved
SOLV 6 Most of the rural roads in our county are now accessible after
devolution
SOLV 7 The quality of water supply in our county has greatly

improved in the last 3 years

SOLV 8 I am satisfied with water supply schedule of county

government
SOLV 9 The county government supply us with enough clean water

on daily basis
SOLV1
There are frequent unplanned water supply interruptions
0

80
 APPENDIX II:

CURRICULUM VITAE

81
 APPENDIX III

BUDGET

No Activities Amount USD

1 Development of proposal, internet and printing costs 450
2 Data collection, entry, internet and analysis costs 350
3 Report writing, editing and printing costs 150

82
Total 950

83