English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

-In 2004 Zimbabwe introduced District Administrators in urban areas in abid to improve governance in this area. However this cadre has meet with several challenges which include lack of specific guiding legislation, lack of resources, and lackof community leadership and accountability of councils. On the other hand urban areas have benefited in areas of housing delivery organization, organization of state functions and civic protection issues. This paper is exposing these challenges and successes of the urban district administrator using the Harare Central District, Zimbabwe as case study. INTRODUCTION Urban areas are today faced with many challenges to include inadequate funding, cleanliness, safety, and diversity. One hopes that when Zimbabwe introduced District Administrators in urban areas and the creation of Metropolitan Provinces in 2004,itwas in abid to overcome some of these problems. Hopeful it was in abid to improve the governance of urban settings which are Harare and Bulawayo. Each of the two Metropolitan Provinces is made up of districts under the management of District Administrators. This paper is giving amicroscopic diagnosis of challenges and successes faced by District Administrators in urban areas focusing mainly on Harare Central District. There are aplethora of challenges being faced by District Administrators in urban areas especially because of the way District Administrators were institutionalized in Zimbabwe. Governance can be defined as the management of public affairs based on defined government policies and implemented through public institutions. District Administrators were introduced in urban area to strengthen governance mechanisms and assist the decentralization of responsibilities and resources to local authority, and encouraging the participation of civil societies to achieve common objectives but this foresight is being hampered by anumber of challenges that this paper will identify. Background Harare Metropolitan Province was created in 2004 through the Provincial Councils and Administration Act (Chapter 29:12). It should be noted that during its inception there was the Provincial Governor (Pg) (A Political Appointee) working hand in glove with the Provincial Administrator and District Administrator (Technocrats). However, with the advent of the New Constitution the post of Provincial Governor wasreplaced with that of the Minister for Provincial Affairs. Within the Harare Metropolitan Province thereare four Local Authorities, these include Harare City Council, Chitungwiza Municipality, Ruwa Town Council and Epworth Local Board. This alone pose as achallenge in the smooth functioning of the province.Harare Province is subdivided into five administrative districts. These include Harare Central District, Ruwa/ Epworth, Highfield, Chitungwiza, Harare North, Mabvuku/Tafara, and Harare South. The sub-division isalso the source of another problem. As there are several District Administrators managing asingle local authority. There is duplication of District Administrator‟s authority in Harare. There is also the legal dilemma,whereby District Administrations (Das) are not included in the Urban Councils Act which means they are currently acting on the basis of delegated authority. Also the Acts governing their roles are not clear as to what they should do thus their roles are shrouded in obscurity.All humanitarian work within the district is carried out by Non-Governmental Organizations (Ngos) Anumber of them exist within Harare Central District. Ngoshave taken over where government ended. They are there to compliment government efforts especially in areas of development. For the complimentary role to be efficient there need to be awater tight relationship between governance institutions. In this case this is the District Administrators office, Council and the Ngos. Together they identify areas were assistance is due and those who should benefit from the various Ngos. It is against this background that the paper dissects this area. In abid to bring out the challenges and successes of the District Administrators in urban areas as observed by those working in this area narrowing to Harare Central District. District Administrators In Urban Areas: Challenges And Success: Case Of Harare Central District .Zimbabwe. DOI: 10.9790/0837-2201064047 www.iosrjournals.org 41 | Page Fig 1: District Administrators Office Hierarchy Source: Ministry Of Local Government Public Records. Provincial Administrator Provincial Administrator (Pa) is appointed by the Public Service Commission and each province is assigned a Provincial Administrator, Harare Metropolitan Province has one. Provincial Administrators are appointed on merit after making applications to Public Service Commission and sitting for an interview, and authorized by section 33 of The Provincial Councils and Administration Act (1985)Provincial Administrators are also recognized by the Constitution (Kurebwa 2015). No legislation sets out the qualifications for, or duties of office, of Provincial Administrators (Matyszak, 2011). The Pa coordinates all the functions of The District Administrators and chairs The Provincial Development Committee (Section 27 of The Provincial Councils and Administration Act Chapter 29:11). District Administrator They form the mantle of the management team that helps the Minister in running the country on all local government issues with the mandate of coordinating multiagency plans at alocal level (Chatizain De Visser 2010). The District Administrators‟ are responsible for their particular district and they conduct their duties in the area that falls under their jurisdictions. There are sixty-one (61) districts in Zimbabwe (Central Statistics Office 2002). Out of the 61, there are fourteen (14) District Administrators in urban areas. That is Harare Metropolitan Province and Bulawayo Metropolitan Province. Conceptual Framework The History of Local Government is generally traced back to the coming in of the British South Africa Company (Bsac) in 1890(Chatiza, 2008).However the first formally established local authority was The Salisbury Sanitary Board in 1891, followed by the first Municipal Law Of 1897 (De Valk And Wekwete 1990). Matabeleland Order in Council Of 1894 saw the creation of Gwaaiand Shangani Reserves hence the beginning of colonial local government (Chatizain De Visser 2010). In terms of urban local government legislation before independence changes were made through the enactment of A Municipal Act In 1930 and The Urban Councils Act in 1973 (Chatiza 2008). It is worth to note that prior to independence, the Local Government Legislation provided for racially divided urban and rural areas, and, anymove to promote black supremacy was subjugated by the whites‟ supremacy policies. The office of The Rural District Administrator came into existence after independence with the sole purpose of addressing the land conflicts in rural areas. Following the commencement of the local government reform in 1980, collective leadership in Zimbabwe has been portrayed by an abundance of covering and incongruent neighborhood authoritative structures, each with its own limits, and drawing on various wellsprings of District Administrators In Urban Areas: Challenges And Success: Case Of Harare Central District .Zimbabwe. DOI: 10.9790/0837-2201064047 www.iosrjournals.org 42 | Page authenticity, which has madefeeble and unique neighborhood establishments (Ncube 2011). As aresult there existed three decentralized structures juxtaposed together. They included The Provincial Development Committees, Ward Development Committees (Wadcos) and Village Development Committees (Vidcos), (Sithole, (1997); Mandondo, 2000 Sited in Ncube 2011). But these are not present in urban areas. Having such structures in rural areas created apool of confusion as there was agrey area on the part of the functions they had to play. Only faith could see the difference, in the same vain there existed Chiefs, Headman and Village Heads who had power over the land. Thus conflicts were rampant in communal areas as the theelected and the traditional authorities conflicted over the administration of the land (Mukamuriand Mavedzenge, 2000). It should be noted that the conflict can be traced back from The Communal Lands Act of 1982 which took the powers of the traditional authorities giving it to the elected official (Ncube 2011). By the advent of this the Government sought to restructure,creating Ministries like The Ministry of Community Development and Cooperatives (Steward e tal 1994), Directives were introduced such as the 1984-5 Prime Ministers Directives (Mandondo 2000). Lastly democratic structures were created at the grassroots level. The Prime Ministers Directive created avenues for grassroots participation, as structures were created that is ward Development Committees (Wardcos) and Village Development Committees (Vidcos) with the motion of practicing bottom up planning and development(Chakaipa 2010). Rural Councils and District Councils were amalgamated through the Rural District Councils Act (Rdc) of 1988 (Jonga 2014). The Government passed the Traditional Leader‟s Act of 2000 and in the process avoiding confusion, tension and conflict of interest. Thereby giving aclearly defined role for the traditional leaders in the discharge of their duties. But all these structures are not part of the urban set up.