World Bank2015-01-062015-01-062014-10https://hdl.handle.net/10986/21099Despite the remarkable progress achieved since the end of the conflict, Burundi still faces significant development challenges. Since 2005, the Government of Burundi has embarked on a potentially transformative process of decentralization, with the aim of strengthening social cohesion, improving local governance, and promoting access to basic infrastructure and service delivery. The weakness of the communal tax system, coupled with low mobilization of local revenue and nonexistent (current) or negligible (capital) transfers from the national budget threaten the financial viability of communes, which struggle to support even basic operating costs. Addressing a specific government request, the present study aims to provide concrete policy recommendations to help the Government of Burundi improve the financial and institutional sustainability of the decentralization reform process, while enabling communes to address popular demands and deliver better services. The report will also look at the implications of these macro-level challenges at the sectoral level, through a case study of the recent experiences of decentralized land administration services, whose responsibilities were recently transferred to communes. The report is based on results from interviews, fieldwork research, and qualitative focus group discussion, combined with existing administrative data and secondary sources on decentralization in Burundi. The present study is organized into four thematic chapters. Chapter one provides a snapshot of Burundiapos;s political and macroeconomic context, and reviews the evolution of the decentralization process to better understand how institutional, political, and bureaucratic dynamics have shaped the historical trajectory of decentralization and generated the outcomes observed today. Chapter two provides a systematic investigation of the status of fiscal decentralization in Burundi, and identifies key policy issues to be considered to ensure the medium-term sustainability of the reform process while at the same time addressing the short-term financial needs of communes. Chapter three provides an in-depth diagnostic of a key service delivery responsibility recently devolved to communes - the provision of land registration services and discusses the challenges and opportunities related to ongoing efforts to scale up access to these land services across 116 rural communes and Bujumbura. Chapter four shifts the focus to the nature of state citizen relations in an effort to better understand how citizen engagement in the decision-making process may be improved and local authorities held accountable for the provision of basic services.En dépit des importantes avancées accomplies depuis la fin du conflit, le Burundi reste confronté à d’importants obstacles pour son développement. Compte tenu d’un héritage historique de conflit, le renforcement des institutions nationales et décentralisées sont une priorité nationale pour améliorer stabilité et prestation de services. Depuis 2005, le Gouvernement du Burundi s’est lancé dans un programme de décentralisation dans le but de renforcer la cohésion sociale, d’améliorer la gouvernance locale et de promouvoir l’accès aux infrastructures et services de base. Depuis 2010, la décentralisation au Burundi est confrontée à de nombreux défis, et plusieurs problèmes doivent encore être réglés avant de pouvoir poursuivre le programme des réformes. La faiblesse du système fiscal communal, associée à la faible mobilisation des recettes fiscales locales et des transferts non existants (courants) ou faibles (capital) en provenance du budget national menace la viabilité financière des communes. En réponse à la demande spécifique du Gouvernement, la présente étude s’attache à fournir des recommandations politiques concrètes pour aider le Gouvernement du Burundi à améliorer la durabilité financière et institutionnelle du processus des réformes de la décentralisation, tout en donnant aux communes les moyens de répondre aux demandes de la population et de fournir de meilleurs services. Ce rapport est tiré des résultats provenant d’entretiens, du travail sur le terrain et de groupes de discussion qualitatifs, associés à des données administratives existantes, ainsi qu’à des sources secondaires traitant de la décentralisation au Burundi. Il est organisé en quatre chapitres thématiques. Le chapitre 1 fournit un instantané du contexte politique et macroéconomique du Burundi et examine l’évolution du processus de décentralisation. Le chapitre 2 est une investigation systématique de l’état de la décentralisation budgétaire. Le chapitre 3 fournit une analyse approfondie des services clés d’enregistrements fonciers des communes. Le chapitre 4 offre une perspective sur la nature des relations État-citoyens.en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOACCOUNTABILITYACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMSACCOUNTINGALLOCATIONAUTHORITYBANKSBASIC SERVICESBUDGET EXPENDITURESBUDGET PREPARATIONBUDGETARY PROCESSCAPITAL EXPENDITURESCENTRAL GOVERNMENTCENTRAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIESCENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALSCENTRAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORTCENTRAL MINISTRIESCENTRAL SPENDINGCENTRAL TRANSFERSCITIZEN PARTICIPATIONCITIZENSCIVIL SERVANTSCIVIL SERVICECIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONSCOALITIONSCOMMUNAL DEVELOPMENTCOMMUNAL TAXCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTCOMMUNITY DRIVEN DEVELOPMENTCONSENSUSCONSOLIDATIONCONSTITUTIONCORRUPTIONCOST OF LIVINGCOUNCILSCURRENT EXPENDITURESDEBTDECENTRALIZATION FRAMEWORKDECENTRALIZATION PROCESSDECENTRALIZATION PROGRAMDECENTRALIZATION REFORMDECENTRALIZATION REFORMSDECENTRALIZATION STRATEGYDECISION-MAKINGDECISION-MAKING PROCESSDECONCENTRATIONDECREEDEMOCRACYDEVOLUTIONDISTRICTDIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIESEFFICIENCY OF SERVICE DELIVERYELECTED OFFICIALSEMPLOYMENTENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATIONEQUALIZATIONETHNIC GROUPSEXECUTIONEXTERNAL SHOCKSFINANCIAL AUTONOMYFINANCIAL IMPLICATIONSFINANCIAL INCENTIVESFINANCIAL MANAGEMENTFINANCIAL RESOURCESFINANCIAL SUPPORTFINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITYFINANCIAL SYSTEMFINANCIAL VIABILITYFINANCING ARRANGEMENTSFISCAL CONSTRAINTSFISCAL DECENTRALIZATIONFISCAL EXPENDITURESFISCAL FRAMEWORKFISCAL REVENUEFISCAL SPACEFISCAL SUSTAINABILITYFISCAL TRANSFERSFIXED COSTSGOOD GOVERNANCEGOVERNANCE INDICATORSGOVERNMENT AGENCIESGOVERNMENT AUTHORITIESGOVERNMENT EFFORTSGOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONSGOVERNMENT OFFICIALSGOVERNMENT REVENUEGOVERNMENT REVENUESGOVERNMENT SPENDINGGOVERNORGROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCTHEALTH CLINICSHEALTH OUTCOMESHUMAN RESOURCEHUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENTHUMAN RESOURCESINFLATIONINSTITUTIONAL CAPACITYINSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTSINSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENTINSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKINSTITUTIONAL REFORMINTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSFERINTERMINISTERIAL COORDINATIONLACK OF TRANSPARENCYLAWSLEASEHOLDSLEGAL FRAMEWORKLEGAL FRAMEWORK FOR DECENTRALIZATIONLEGAL PROVISIONSLEGISLATIONLEGISLATIVE PROCESSLIBERATIONLOCAL ADMINISTRATIONSLOCAL AUTHORITIESLOCAL GOVERNMENTLOCAL GOVERNMENTSLOCAL REVENUELOCAL TAXLOCAL TAXESMACROECONOMIC CONTEXTMANDATESMAYORMEMBERS OF PARLIAMENTMINISTRY OF FINANCEMINISTRY OF INTERIORMUNICIPAL LEVELMUNICIPALITIESNATIONAL BUDGETNATIONAL ELECTIONSNATIONAL LEVELNATIONAL PLANNINGNATIONAL POLICYNATIONAL PRIORITYNATIONAL TERRITORYNATIONSNATURAL RESOURCESOPERATING COSTSPERFORMANCE EVALUATIONPOLICY DOCUMENTPOLICY FRAMEWORKPOLICY MAKERSPOLICY OBJECTIVESPOLICY RECOMMENDATIONSPOLITICAL CONTROLPOLITICAL CRISISPOLITICAL DECENTRALIZATIONPOLITICAL POWERPOLITICAL REFORMSPOLITICAL SURVIVALPOLITICIANSPOVERTY ALLEVIATIONPRESIDENCYPROPERTY TAXESPROVINCEPROVINCESPROVINCIAL DEPARTMENTSPROVINCIAL LEVELPUBLIC AUTHORITIESPUBLIC EXPENDITUREPUBLIC EXPENDITURE REVIEWPUBLIC FINANCEPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTPUBLIC HEALTHPUBLIC RESOURCESPUBLIC REVENUEPUBLIC SECTORPUBLIC SECTOR SPECIALISTPUBLIC SERVICEPUBLIC SERVICESREFERENDUMREFORM AGENDAREFORM PROCESSREGULATORY FRAMEWORKREHABILITATIONREPRESENTATIVESREVENUE AUTHORITYREVENUE COLLECTIONREVENUE SHARINGSECTORAL MINISTRIESSENATESOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURESOCIAL SERVICESSTATE RESOURCESSUBNATIONALSUBNATIONAL AUTHORITIESSUBNATIONAL FINANCESUBNATIONAL GOVERNMENTSSUBSIDIARYTAX ADMINISTRATIONTAX BASETAX CODETAX COLLECTIONTAX COLLECTORTAX COMPLIANCETAX EXEMPTIONSTAX POLICYTAX REVENUETAX REVENUESTAX SYSTEMTAXABLE CAPACITYTAXPAYERSTECHNICAL ASSISTANCETRANSPARENCYUNCERTAINTYVILLAGESVOTINGWATER SUPPLY10.1596/21099