Decentralization in Response to Drought : A Case Study to Somalia

Sammanfattning: Decentralization has been one of the most extensively accepted political strategies since the 1980s, especially when it comes to development administration complemented by the expansion of democratization at lower levels of government. It acts as a bottom-top of authority. A proponent of decentralization argues that decentralization strengthens democracy, good governance and accountability. It is more effective and closer to the people because power is delegated to the local authority. Opponents of decentralization beliefs that is difficult to coordinate many local governments and demanding financial and human capital. This paper lies under that debate and presents how decentralization responds to droughts as a case study to Somalia.  Somalia has been exercising a highly centralized administration for a long time but now changed the structure of the government and built up a federal member states where the administration is widely decentralized. To understand the effectiveness of the system to mitigate and prevent droughts, the study will look at two different scenarios of droughts that hit the country. One was the mid-1970s under highly centralized administration while the other drought hit the country 2011-2012 under the decentralized structure of governance. This comparison aims to see the impact and respond that each system showed. The result will help the country to redesign their future prevention strategy and minimize the vulnerability of the droughts. Because of drought is one of the most destructive environmental phenomena, doing enormous damage to humankind and the livelihoods.