The Decentralization of Project Design as a Way of Poverty Reduction A Case Study Kagoma Parish, Buwenge Sub-county, Jinja District

ABSTRACT This study examined the role of decentralization of project design in poverty reduction. Decentralization has given power to local population since it was established in the country. However, the central government remains important figure behind project implementation especially in terms of funding. This policy’s main aim was to give power to the local leaders as well as social planners to identify potential areas of development and both central government and NGO have to assist them in funding. The study revealed that decentralization of project design had a strong support and impact on the poverty reduction, through giving authority to design their projects. Using a purposive sampling method the researcher selected the most informed category of respondents to answer questionnaire and interview, the observation method was also used. Both qualitative and quantitative was used to collect and analyze data and was presented in form of tables. The study population was ( 370 respondents) that is to say, local leaders, most educated people, social planners and few local people in Kagoma parish. The findings established that a good number of community members know the decentralization policy although their knowledge regarding its operations is quite limited. For instance, monitoring and evaluation of projects has been done on a minimal scale, community involvement has also been rated poorly by the key informants with a notion that they were not well consulted by project managers. They also pointed out xli that, corruption, nepotism, illiteracy and lack of skills on the part of implementers, really have led to weak the promotion of transparency and accountability. Among the recommended suggestions were that it is necessary to inform community members on the monitoring and evaluation role and how they should demand for accountability. The politicians, implementers, planners and managers must stay at a distanced from local funds~ Again proper and popular methods of project identification and design must be adopt

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION v

APPROVAL vi

APPROVAL SHEET vii

DEDICATION viii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS xi

ABSTRACT xii

CHAPTER ONE 1

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1. Back ground of the study~ 1

1.2. Statement of the problem 5

1.4 Objectives of the study 6

1.5. Research questions 7

1.6 Scope of the study 7

1.8 Theoretical frame work 10

1.9 Conceptual frame work

CHAPTER TWO .13

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 13

2.3. Objective of decentralization 14

2.4. The importance of community participation 16

2.5 The different terms under decentralization 17

2.6. Political decentralization 17

2.7. Administrative Decentralization 18

2.8. Idea of popular participation in Latin America 21

2.9. Poverty 21

2.10. Characteristics of poverty 22

2.11. Poverty threshold 23

2.12. Absolute Poverty 23

2.13. Relative Poverty 24

2.14. Causes of poverty 24

2.15. Effects of poverty 26

2.16. Physical Effects of Poverty 26

2.18. Social Effects of Poverty 28

2.19. Poverty Reduction 29

2.20, Poverty eradication 30

2.21. Poverty assessment 31

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOG’Y

3.1. Researching

3.2. Sampling Procedure~35

Data Research and Procedure Reliability of the Sicily.....................................................

of the Instrument.......................... 40

CHAPTER FOUR

4.1. finalists arid Interpretations of data ............................................................42

4.2. Advantages of decentralizing the project design In eradicate poverty. .................42

4.3. DecentralizatIon led In the awareness of local people In partidpate In project

design? ................................................. ......................... ................................ 46

4.7. In which way monitoring and evaluation carried out? .........................................54

4.8. Interview

4.9. What are the challenges faced by sodal planners In Implement the goals of

decentralization in this parish?.................................................................................56

CHAPTER FIVE 60

CONCLUSION, REFLECTION, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............... 60

5.0 Over View 60

5.LConclusions 60

5.2. Reflection 62

5.3 Implication 64

5.4. Recommendation 65

REFERENCES 66

APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW ON THE DECENTRALIZATION OF PROJECT DESIAS WAY OF

POVERTY REDUCTION 69

APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE DECENTRALIZATION OF PROJECT DESIGN AS

WAY OF POVERTY REDUCTION 71