1. Decentralization and Local Governance in Fragile Contexts
Seth Kaplan

2. The big picture
Sources of fragility (societal fragmentation and lack of institutionalization)
Change in balance of power between state and non-state actors
Why transitions are much harder now than in the past
Why institution building works better than state building

3. Advantages
Highly rated as a tool to manage conflict in socially fragmented countries
Greater legitimacy of the state; produces fewer grievances and less polarization
More scope to leverage social cohesion (if greater locally than nationally) More scope to leverage institutions that already work (work with the grain; go hybrid)

4. Advantages cont.
Formal institutions more likely to extend across territory
Potentially more accountability of political leaders

5. Disadvantages
Same problems that exist nationally can exist locally (social fragmentation, state capture, corruption, etc.)
If economy weak, a lack of local revenue source
Potential for regional imbalances
Need to strengthen institutions in more places
Potential to encourage secessionism

6. Conclusions
Understanding context very important to any strategy; need to move away from templates (importance of assessments)
Decentralization can help in many places, but implementation formula (e.g., mix between central and local institutions) needs to vary across contexts
More likely to succeed when local groups are already cohesive

7. Conclusions cont.
Ideally, efforts to help local institutions needs to be done in parallel with national institutions so they work together in a virtuous cycle
Efforts to work on local institutions need to build in processes that can counter the disadvantages (e.g., strengthen accountability mechanisms when these are weak; seek ways to handle issues such as migration that disrupts cohesion locally)

8. Conclusions cont.
Local institutions may be better entry points than national in some cases (e.g., Nigeria, Libya)
Efforts need to be sustained over long time horizon yet balance short, medium, and long term goals

9. The role of non-state actors
In some cases, these will be more capable than state actors; in such cases, work with
Need to find inexpensive ways to catalyze local efforts, but without necessarily having blueprints determining end results
Need to be flexible; set minimum standards for performance around ideas such as inclusiveness, justice, and delivery of goods, not liberal ideas such as electoral politics; use carrots and sticks where possible

10. The role of non-state actors cont.
Need to bring in 3D at times (diplomacy, defense, development) to assist; conflict management, security; economic opportunity
In some cases, hybrid institutions that leverage best working local institutions in local governance offer the best way forward
Relationship between the state and various actors can be fluid; policies need to take into account the changing dynamic

11. The role of non-state actors cont.
All of this points to the need for much more sustained investment in local knowledge and mechanisms to ensure this is fed back into policy decisions