A trend towards decentralized systems of government and the strengthening of subnational governance is underway globally. However, decentralization has many different meanings, and it is frequently left undefined, even while it is being implemented. This chapter argues that enhanced understanding of concepts and theories can contribute to improved practice during decentralization reforms, and consequently be of benefit both to governments and their citizens. Drawing on the theoretical, research and public administration literature, an approach is adopted that aims to inform decentralization praxis, that is, the interplay of policy, strategy, implementation and review. The material is used as a foundation for presenting a synthesis-framework for praxis that draws attention to: appreciating the theoretical scope of fiscal decentralization; focusing on the country and its goals; considering the design of the system of multi-level governance; focusing on central and local capacity; and adopting flexibility, supported by feedback mechanisms, in the process of decentralization.

This chapter offers a critical theoretically informed and policy-relevant exploration of some of the most prevalent conceptual strands informing place-based development scholarship, discourse, and practice. In doing so, it examines the emphasis on co-operation, open governance, and the assumption that all places have the potential to grow and prosper. Further, it analyzes normative dispositions – namely that place-based modes of subnational development could represent a viable and progressive approach which reconciles pervasive tensions between economic growth and spatial equity. In the process, the chapter identifies four key conceptual strands that characterize place-based development theory and practice.

The Electoral Risk Management Tool (ERMTool) is designed to empower people to ensure peaceful and credible elections. Intended users are electoral management bodies, security sector agencies, civil society and other state and non-state actors. The ERMTool aims to build the user’s capacity to understand, analyze, and mitigate electoral risks. The ERMTool can build users' capacity to understand electoral risk factors, collect and analyze risk data, design prevention and mitigation strategies, and record the results of actions. The tool consists of three integrated parts. A knowledge library describes in detail 36 electoral risk factors, both internal and external to electoral processes. An analytical instruments section allows users to create analytical models specific to a country or election, upload data to generate risk maps and trend charts, and create a register of risks and actions. The prevention module consists of a digital library with approximately 100 action points intended to inspire user in designing strategies to prevent and mitigate electoral risks, including election-related violence, at the different phases of the electoral cycle.

We review recent evidence regarding decentralization and state strength and argue that decentralization can deepen democracy without compromising state strength if adequately designed. We examine how decentralization affects five key aspects of state strength: 1) Authority over territory and people, 2) Conflict prevention, 3) Policy autonomy and the ability to uphold the law, 4) Responsive, accountable service provision, and 5) Social learning. We provide specific reform paths that should lead to strengthening in each. Decentralizing below the level of social cleavages should drain secessionist pressure by peeling away moderate citizens from radical leaders. The regional specificity of elite interests is key. If regional elites have more to lose than gain from national schism, they will not invest in politicians and conflicts that promote secession. Strong accountability mechanisms and national safeguards of minority rights can align local leaders’ incentives with citizens’, so promoting power-sharing and discouraging local capture or oppression. “Fragmentation of authority” is a mistaken inference; what decentralization really does is transform politics from top-down to bottom-up, embracing many localities and their concerns. The state moves from a simpler, brittler command structure to one based on overlapping authority and complex complementarity, where government is more robust to failure in any of its parts. Well-designed reform, focusing on services with low economies of scale, with devolved taxation and bail-outs prohibited, should increase public accountability. Lastly, we advance a novel way that decentralization can strengthen democracy: by allowing citizens to become political actors in their own right, the small scale of local politics should promote social learning-by-doing, so strengthening political legitimacy, state-building, and ‘democratic suppleness’ from the grassroots upwards.

Everyone seems to want data or more data. Data that helps target the 'right' people with the 'right' things. Data on the billions who suffer deprivations as legitimation for the entire aid and development business. Data to measure and monitor the global goals and targets that governments have agreed to (or hopefully will agree to within the proposed Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). There is also an enthusiasm for mining existing datasets. All this was highlighted by A World That Counts, a report prepared at the request of the UN Secretary General. This suggests that the data revolution can be a revolution for equality.