In the December 2012 issue of this Journal, Lucy Slack and Susan Rhodes (2012) of the Commonwealth Local Government Forum (CLGF) introduced a new CLGF programme focussing on improving governance and service delivery at local level in selected Commonwealth countries in Southern and West Africa and South Asia (CLGF no date; CLGF 2015). The initiative is in the third year of its four-year lifespan and it is opportune to examine progress made so far towards achieving the development aims sought by the programme funders, CLGF and partners in 2012. This contribution will explore the operationalisation of the programme to date through a snapshot of implementation in one country under the Southern Africa component of the programme, Swaziland. It will briefly describe how the project emerged, what it intends to achieve, examine progress to date and conclude with some observations around what has been learned so far. The paper draws on the author’s work as Regional Adviser for the CLGF Southern Africa Programme based in Pretoria and project documentation (see Acknowledgements).

Botswana, a middle-income country, is experiencing a sluggish economic growth and a rapid urbanisation which has brought in its wake high unemployment, poverty and food insecurity. This has led some people to engage in subsistence and commercial urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA) to address these problems. However, in spite of its known advantages, uptake of UPA has been low for a number of reasons including: high GDP before the economic meltdown of recent years; a harsh climate; lack of water; poor access to land; and over-reliance on generous government handouts. Nevertheless, the extent of its practice and its contribution to food security – albeit modest – shows that it is a sector that needs to be encouraged and supported. Both central and local government can play a big role by providing land and infrastructure, and also by implementing an enabling policy and regulatory environment which promotes small- and medium-scale urban food production.

In 1997 Local Government Studies published an article (Asquith, 1997) which assessed the perceptions of managerial and political elites in eight English local authorities towards change management against the background of Conservative Governments' reform agendas. The article argued that the authorities could be placed on a continuum depending on their state of organisational evolution, with some authorities being better equipped to manage change than others. During 2005 the authorities were revisited to ascertain how they had adapted to deal with the reforming Blair Governments since 1997. What this article shows is that characteristics evidenced in the original work in the authority deemed to have evolved the most, were present in those authorities revisited.

The rationale for local fiscal autonomy suggests that local expenditure and local revenue generation should remain in close proximity. This is achieved through fiscal decentralisation to local government, to ensure efficient provision of local services that align with local needs, and to improve accountability to residents. Fiscal decentralisation has found resonance in developing countries through local government reforms, but in Africa fiscal decentralisation has been focussed mainly on revenue sharing, except in a few cases where some local fiscal autonomy has been achieved. Urbanisation in Africa is likely to continue (UN-Habitat, 2008), necessitating an increase in municipal service delivery which African cities must finance - hence the need for local fiscal autonomy. Local fiscal autonomy is arguably contentious for African cities, partly because provision of municipal services must be tempered with considerations of equity and redistribution to the poorer urban populations, and because inadequate welfare nets from national government do not subsidise the gap in municipal revenue. In the recent past, Kenya and South Africa adopted local government reforms in different forms that has yielded different forms of local fiscal autonomy. The paper conducts a comparative of local fiscal autonomy in municipal services provision in Nairobi and Johannesburg.