DEVOLUTION AND SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE IN KENYA, A CASE STUDY OF MARSABIT COUNTY GOVERNMENT

Salim Said Ali, Dr. Wepukhulu Joshua Matanda

Abstract


Devolved government consistently encompasses a shift of power and control, and thus challenges accountability and service delivery. This study sought to determine the effects of devolution on service delivery in the public service in Kenya, a case study of Marsabit county government. The study was guided by the following general objectives; to evaluate the influence of resources allocation to counties on service delivery, to determine the effect of public participation on service delivery. To achieve the objectives of the study primary data was collected through questionnaire administration. The data collected, tabulated and analyzed using multivariate regression model with the aid of SPSS version 25 software. A mixed methods research is preferable for the study due to the provision of a better conception of a research issue or dilemma and that a solo research approach is inadequate. A mixed research approach is a research master plan that combines qualitative and quantitative research components to deal with research issues to enter into healthy research conclusions. The study was used questionnaires for data collection from the staff members. The questionnaires will consist of both open and close-ended questions. The close-ended questions provided more structured responses to facilitate tangible recommendations. The findings of the study indicated that; allocation of funds and approved for decision making were significant variables in the determination of service delivery at Marsabit County government. The findings further indicate that Marsabit County is not well staffed hence likely impacting on the quality of service delivery. The study concludes that for service delivery to be enhanced in Marsabit County government enhanced: financial allocation, public participation, accountability and transparency and staffing has to put in place.

Keywords: Resources Allocation, Public Participation, Service Delivery

Full Text:

PDF

References


Aberdeen, G. (2010). Best practices in E -Procurement: Abridged report. New York: American Association for Public Opinion and Research.

Abii, F. E., & Rose, J. M. (2013). Effects of individual and organizational factors on the turnover intentions of information technology professionals. International Journal of Management, 30(2), 740.

Atieno, P J, Nancy E.,& Spitzer, D., (2014) Kenyan Nurses Involvement in National Policy Development Processes Nursing Research and Practice Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 236573, 10 pages

Azfar, O. e. a. (1999). Decentralization, Governance and Public Services: The Impact of Institutional Arrangements. Workimg Paper No.255, IRIS Center.

Bertot, J., & Janowski, T. (2016). Universal and contextualized public services: Digital public service innovation framework.

Best J. W. & Kahn J. V. (2006). Research in education (10th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.

Blunt, P. & Turner, M. (2007). Decentralization, Deconcentration, and Poverty Reduction in the Asia Pacific’, in G.S. Cheema and D.A. Rondinelli (Eds) Decentral.

Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (2003). Educational Research: An Introduction (Fifth Ed.).

New York: Longman.

Butler, D. C., & Bazemore, A. W. (2013). Measures of social deprivation that predict health care access and need within a rational area of primary care service delivery. Health services research, 48(2pt1), 539-559.

Conyers, D. (2007). Decentralisation and Service Delivery: Lessons from Subâ€Saharan Africa. IDS bulletin, 38(1), 18-32.

Cheema, S., & Rondinelli, A. (2007). Decentralizing governance: emerging concepts and practices. Brookings Institution Press.

Chukwuemeka, E., Ugwuanyi, B. I., Ndubuisi-Okolo, and P. &“Nigeria Local Government: A Discourse on the Theoretical Imperatives in a Governmental System.†An International Multidisciplinary Journal, Ethiopia, Vol. 8 (2), 305-324.

Eakin, H., & Anderies, J. M. (2016). Cognitive and institutional influences on farmers’ adaptive capacity: insights into barriers and opportunities for transformative change in central Arizona. Regional environmental change, 16(3), 801-814.

Elsageer, A., and MbwambJ. (2004). Does Decentralization Have a Positive Impact on the Use of Natural Resources? A Paper for Interdisciplinary Course, International Doctoral Studies at University of Bonn.

Elliot, M. (2004). How procurement managers view low cost countries and geographies: a perceptual mapping approach. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(3), 224-243.

Enikolopov, R., and Zhuravskaya, E. (2007). Decentralization and political institutions. Journal of Public Economics, 91, 2261-2290.

Faems, D., & Sels, L. (2005). The effect of individual HR domains on financial performance.

Farooq, M. K., Shamail, S., and Awais, M. M. (2008). Devolution in a Virtual Enterprise. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, 283, 433–440.

Godda, H. G. (2014). Decentralization of Secondary School Management in Tanzania: Strengths and Prospects. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(37), 116-124.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.