An analysis of PA relations in successful implementation of the local government

programms

The proposal must contain a preliminary presentation of the scientific approach,

theoretical foundation, methodological approach and progression plan

Political-administrative dynamics: Studying the interaction between the political and the
administrative sphere to understand the dynamics of overlapping responsibilities, and to
understand how interaction varies between different contexts (nation, administrative levels,
formal structures).

Introduction
Many scholars (Rouban, 2015;Ahmed, 2010; Ewurum, Eboh and Igwe, 2009; Landa, 2015
and Vincent, 2018) have indicated poor implementation of development programmes in the
local government authorities. The scholars pointed out different reasons for the failure of the
local government to realize effective implementation of programmes. Attention is not
adequately given to the relationship between councilors and administrators since they are
interrelated but perform different roles (Pollitt and Bouckaert, 2011). These two actors are
important in the formulation and implementation of development programmes at local level.
Due to that, their relationship is very critical, multi-faceted and complex. Rouban (2015)
postulate that political-administrative relations have suffered from contradictory trends in
most industrialized countries and developing countries can not be [Link] calls for a need
to have a glance at councilors and administrator’s relations in projects implementation. It is
because the failure and the success of project implementation is determined by the
nature(type) of relationship that exist between councilors and administrators.

Although councilors and administrators do not perform the same function but they are
interdependent in ensuring the success of local authorities. The councilors role is to ensure
community needs are met. That is why they are bestowed with the responsibility to present
community priorities in the council. Secondly, they are charged with the responsibility to
ensure that community needs are reflected in the council budget and thus development
programmes reflect community priorities. In this regard, councilors play a very crucial role in
decision making on who should get what, why and when. However, it should be noted that
the councilor relies mostly on the information provided by the technocrats. On the other side,
administrators are supposed to respond to the community needs presented by the councilors.
This means that they need to ensure that programmes implemented reflect community needs.
In short the administrator’s role revolves around how and why should the resources be
distributed (implementation). In this case councilors need administrators to carry out the
implementation and administrators need councilors for resources allocation a well as
guideline setting. It is vividly that without councilors and administrators nothing can be
achieved in terms of service delivery. If that is the case their interaction matters.

Due to their interdependences, good relations is [Link] collaboration of elected leaders

(politicians) and administrators is expected to ensure that the local authorities realize their
objectives (Daily News-Tanzania, August 28th, 2012).In this regards, councilors and
administrators need to work as partners. Unfortunately, many studies have indicated poor
relationship. (Dag, 1999;Njunwa, 2018; Land, 2015;Vincent,2015;Mafuruet al., 2015).
But what is not known is how their interaction (weather good or bad) facilitate or impede the
implementation of development programmes?

The Zimbabwe local government authorities consists of two different wings (political and
administrative). Political wing consist of councilors who elected to represent the interest of
their people. The administrative wing consist of technocrats who are suppose to exercise their
duties based on their professionalism. The Zimbabwe local government
local Authority’s (LAs) are the crucial service providers of social services provision in areas
that fall within their jurisdiction. Local authorities are creatures of statutes/Acts of parliament
and therefore operate within the legislative framework enacted and promulgated by central
government (legislature) as the primary legislative authority section 32 (1) of the Constitution
of Zimbabwe, but also enjoy subsidiary or secondary legislative authority as provided in
section 32 (2) of the constitution of Zimbabwe, section 228 of the Urban Councils Act,
Chapter 29.15 for urban local authorities and section 88 of the Rural District Councils Act,
Chapter 29.13 (Vincent, 2015). Public service delivery includes infrastructure development,
health and education services, water and sanitation as well as agricultural development.
The council is the engine of the local authority owing to the fact that it has a direct influence
on the technocrat’s decisions or actions. The council sets the tone that guides the
implementation of policies thereby reflecting the citizen priorities.

According to () Who is the Author here when the politico-administrative relationship is well
nurtured, this provides the platform for the successful implementation of the development
programmes in areas within their jurisdiction. The collaboration of elected leaders
(politicians) and administrators is expected to ensure that the local authorities realise their
objectives (Daily News-Tanzania, August 28th, 2012).In performing the above functions, two
kinds of officials, namely elected and appointed officials have to work together to
successfully implement local government functions (Landa, 2015)

The extent to which policies are implemented successfully depends largely by relations
between the politician and the administrators either being partners or a collaborative
relationship.

Zimbabwe has a three tier government system that is, national government, provincial and
metropolitan councils and local government.
The IGR system of Zimbabwe is a product of a fairly long and complex historical and institutional
context. Throughout this historical transformation there has been a wide shift of IGR reflecting
varied ideological contexts. The relationship between the different levels of government has been
configured at each different point to reflect the peculiarities of each political system. Is this copy
& paste

The council is the engine of the local authority owing to the fact that it has a direct influence
on the technocrats decisions or actions. The council sets the tone that guides the
implementation of policies thereby reflecting the citizen priorities. According to () Author
please when the politico-administrative relationship is well nurtured, this provides the
platform for the successful implementation of the development programmes in the localities.
The collaboration of elected leaders (politicians) and administrators is expected to ensure that
the local authorities realise their objectives (Daily News-Tanzania, August 28th, 2012).In
performing the above functions, two kinds of officials, namely elected and appointed officials
have to work together to successfully implement local government functions (Landa, 2015)
The extent to which policies are implemented successfully depends largely by relations
between the politician and the administrators either being partners or a collaborative
relationship.

Statement of the problem

Periodic assessment of local authorities policies and programmes is pertinent in ensuring that
planned benefits are delivered to the intended recipients (Langbein and Knack, 2010). The
elected officials are mandate to by the urban councils Act with an oversight role of
monitoring the technocrats while they implement policies and carry out council decisions.
Different relations (cooperation, partnership convergence and divergence) between
technocrats and councilors has resulted in an effective or delays policy implementation at
local level. The power overlap between the two parties in strategy implementation is
detrimental to to good governance in local authorities.

Objectives of the study

 Examine the PA relationship in decision making of local authority

Understand the Political administrative relationship in the local government

Examine the impact of Political-Administrators relationship on local government success
What does an administrator do if the political decision runs counter to accepted standards
within a profession?
Is there one objective with explanation or use same format or bullet on all objectives for
uniformity

Literature review
Max weber of the bureaucracy theory is a pillar and foundation of public administration.
Weber (1946) explains two main propositions that firstly, the policies are developed by
politicians and implemented by civil servants (Administrators). Secondly, the existence of a
relationship which functions under strict division of labor or tasks and without overlap in the
functions. Weber (1946) postulate a rational and legal institution that is efficient because of
clear relationships between the administrators and [Link] to Weber the state
bureaucracy is primarily based on power and authority in other words, Politicians (elected
officials) are power elites. Basically the main actors consist of Politicians, technical experts
(Administrators) having knowledge and experience. Van Riper (1984) postulate that
administrators should not be directly and actively involved in politics and should serve as the
neutral servants of their political masters. The theory sets the tone for separation of duties
(Administrators and Politicians) but also emphasis the relationship between these two
players. Considering the above propositions the relationship between the politician and the
administrators is to give direction to the later by the former through policy design and
formulation. The administrators will act in common interest through policy implementation
by selecting the appropriate way of achieving the target in the best way possible. Weber
emphasized control from top to bottom in the form of monocratic hierarchy. This is the
system of control in which the policy is set at the top and carried out through a series of
offices (Administrators). Mafuru, Mpenzi, Lyatonga, Tefurukwa, Masue, Ngowiand Wilfred
(2015) argue that the politicians has a dominant power in the decision making process. For
instance, agenda, proposals, decisions and control over the implementation of policies is not
based on legitimacy and loyalty, nonetheless on the basis of political resources, competence
to hire and fire administrators and to garner grass root support (Mafuruet al.,
2015).According to Weber, the honor of politicians, is based in their personal, ethical
responsibility for their actions.
On the other hand, administrator’s morality is bestowed in their ability to perform
conscientiously the lawful orders of politicians. In executing their tasks, a sense of duty is
more important than personal opinion. Theirs is the function of the impersonal, passionless
application of the [Link] (1999) argue that the administrators have influence over the
politician in decision making and also at the implementation stage (ex ante and ex post)due to
information asymmetry. However, the administrators are guided by professional values while
the politicians incomplete statement. Furthermore, Weber (1946) clearly envisaged that risk if
there was an overlapping of functions between the two parties. The administrators would
subvert the rule of law if they were to extend beyond their administrative function in that they
would not be controlled or inspected on their own.

Significance of the theory

The theory clearly stipulates that the politicians and administrators should work together and
to use their core competences and powers for the successful implementation of plans. The
bureaucracy theory is realistically designed to realize functional performance at all levels. As
a result, each function (or department) of the bureaucracy should contribute to the
achievement of the organizational objectives or mission. Secondly, Weber advocates for a
scientific selection of administrator’s foe a prospective job in order to effectively execute
tasks. The theory lays the basis for job promotion of both the administrators and elected
representative to be based purely on technical competences. Thirdly, there is clear division of
work (vertical and horizontal). Each actor has a specialized function based on their area of
expertise, that is the administrators have a clear job description based on their education
qualification to execute the task. On the other hand, the elected representatives have their
defined power and authority within which they exercise it in order to attain the achievement
of goals.
In addition, the theory brings out the importance of different relationships in any
organization. The politician oversight role in policy design and the administrator rational
discretion in policy implementation will ensure the successful achievement of organizational
goals. The collaboration of elected officials (politicians) and administrators will enable that
local authorities to achievement their goals. The theory clearly provides boundaries for each
actors to exercise their technical competences without crossing the others sphere of influence.
The theory is very helpful with regard to the recruitment of the administrators that they
should be based on expertise. This will be pertinent when they advice the politicians of the
best possible outcomes or policy decisions.

Weakness of the Weber theory

The Bureaucracy theory has been criticized by a number of scholars firstly, for the notion that
bureaucratic organizations are based on rational-legal authority. According to Parsons (1947)
and Gouldner (1954) the proposition that authority rests both in the "legal incumbancy of
office" and on "technical competence" is only relevant if superiors have more knowledge and
skill, but often this is not the [Link] theory fails to consider the environment in which these
actors interact and properly set the guidelines of each player when they interact. The social
and political spheres greatly affect the bureaucracy theory. In addition, in the modern day
democratic state the executive powers exert a lot of influence to the relationships between the
different stakeholder in organizational management. Thirdly, the exercising control power of
elected representatives was underestimated in theory. The classical Weberian is criticised
because it did not realistically describe actual role definitions of politicians and
administrators (Aberbach and Rockman, 1988).
Methodology

Study plan
Duration Activity
1st Year  -Proposal writing
 -undertaking research courses
 presenting the proposal to the
university committee
2nd Year  -Pre-testing the data to ensure
reliability and validity
 -Data analysis after pre-testing
 -Supervisor input on the results
presented
 -Data collection (Fieldwork)
 -Data analysis
3rd Year  Report writing
 Submitting draft to the supervisor
Reference
Aberbach, J. D., and Rockman, B. A. (1988).Mandates or mandarins? Control and discretion
in the modern administrative [Link] Administration Review, 606-612.
Ewurum, U.J.F., Eboh, F.E. and Igwe, N.N. (2009). Managing Development Projects for
success and sustainability in Nigeria, The Nigerian Journal of Development Studies 7(1),
ISSN: 0189 – 2614 pp. 125 – 127. 14.
Ewurum, UJF, Eboh, F.E. and Igwe, N.N. (2009). “Empirical Investigation of the Project
Management Lapses of Non-governmental Organisations in Enugu State” The Nigerian
Journal of Management Research 4, 1, pp. 35-37.
Jacobsen, D. I. (1999). Trust in Political-Administrations: The case of Local Authorities in
Norway and Tanzania, Elsevier World Development, 27, 839 – 853.
[Link]
Landa, E. (2015). Is Apolitical Endeavour Desirable in Local Government Authorities
Today? American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology and Science, 31,
85 - 89
Mafuru,W., Mpenzi D., Lyatonga, I., Oscar Tefurukwa, O., Masue, O., Ngowi R. and
Wilfred L. (2015). Politico-Administrative Relations in Tanzanian Local Government
Authorities Members: Institutional and Organizational Development (IOD)
Van Riper, P.P. (1984) “The politics‐administration dichotomy: concept or reality?”, in
Rabin, J. and Bowman, J.S. (Eds), Politics and Administration: Woodrow Wilson and
American Public Administration, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, pp. 17‐30.
Vincent CS (2015) Central-local Government Relations: Implications on the Autonomy and
Discretion of Zimbabwe’s Local Government. Journal Political Science and Public Affairs
3:143. doi: 10.4172/2332-0761.1000143
Weber (1972,1946).Gezag en [Link]: UniversitairePresse.
Weber (2006), Professional Authority model
Wilson, W. (1887).The Study of Administration. Political Science Quarterly 2 (2), pp. 197-
202
Pollitt, C and Bouckaert,G (2011). Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis:
New Public Management, Governance and the Neo-Weberian State, 3rdEdn (Oxford: Oxford
University Press).
Rouban L. (2015) Political-Administrative Relations: Evolving Models of Politicization. In:
van der Meer F.M., Raadschelders J.C.N., Toonen T.A.J. (eds) Comparative Civil Service
Systems in the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan, London