The Pro-Decentralization Effect on Management of Local Enterprises: A Structural Model of the Case of Bamenda III municipality Mezam Division, Cameroon
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.91.9584Keywords:
Pro-decentralization, Management of Local enterprises, Structural Equation, CameroonAbstract
The study was aimed at investigating the effect of pro-decentralization on management of local enterprises in Bamenda III municipality, North West Region of Cameroon. Data was derived through the use of questionnaire on a sample of 500 registered voters and businessmen who have knowledge of local enterprises in Bamenda III using purposive sampling approach. The objective was achieved by applying maximum likelihood estimation technique of structural equation modelling using SmartPLS software version 2. The empirical results revealed that pro-decentralization has a significant positive effect on the management of local enterprises and corruption orientation. Corruption orientation has a negative influence on the management of local enterprises, though not found to be significant. The finding indicated that a unit increase in pro-decentralization has the tendency to improve the management of local enterprises to the tune of 63%. The study therefore recommends that policies of decentralization should be corruption free and should be directed towards enhancing service quality of local enterprises.
References
Alderman, H. (1998). Social assistance in Albania: Decentralization and targeted transfers. The World Bank.
Azfar, O., Kähkönen, S., Livingston, J., Meagher, P., & Rutherford, D. (2000). Making decentralization work: An empirical investigation of governance and public services in Uganda. IRIS Centre, University of Maryland.
Bardhan, P. (2002). Decentralization of governance and development. Journal of Economic perspectives, 16(4), 185-205.
Bentler, P. M. (1992). On the fit of models to covariance and methodology to the Bulletin. Psychological bulletin, 112(3), 400.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment (Vol. 17). Sage publications.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
De Mello, L. (2000). Can fiscal decentralization strengthen social capital? (No. 2000-2129). International Monetary Fund.
Faguet, J. P. (2001). Does decentralization increase government responsiveness to local needs? Decentralization and public investment in Bolivia. Centre for Economic Performance Working Paper, London School of Economics.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.
Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (2001). Democratization, decentralization and the distribution of local public goods in a poor rural economy. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/abr.91.9584 60
Fisman, R., & Gatti, R. (2002). Decentralization and corruption: evidence across countries. Journal of public economics, 83(3), 325-345.
Huther, J., & Shah, A. (1998). Applying a simple measure of good governance to the debate on fiscal decentralization (Vol. 1894). World Bank Publications.
Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic management journal, 20(2), 195-204.
Saavedra, L. L. (2004). Decentralising the public sector: Fiscal Decentralisation as a Mechanism to Modernise the State-Truths and Myths. CESIFO dice report, 2(1), 15-20.
La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1999). The quality of government. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 15(1), 222-279.
Lindaman, K., & Thurmaier, K. (2002). Beyond efficiency and economy: An examination of basic needs and fiscal decentralization. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 50(4), 915-934.
Lipset, S. M., & Lenz, G. S. (1999). Corruption. Culture and Markets, George Mason University, Arlington, VA, 24.
Letelier, S. L. (2001) Effect of Fiscal Decentralisation on the Efficiency of the Public Sector. The Cases of Education and Health. Proceeding of the IIPF Conference on Public Finance, August 2001, Linz, Austria.
Martinez-Vazquez, J., & McNab, R. M. (2003). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth. World development, 31(9), 1597-1616.
Ofeh, M. A., & Thalut, N. (2018). Financial Exclusion and Sustainable Rice Production: A Model of Poverty Reduction in Ndop, Cameroon. SSRG International Journal of Economics Management Studies (SSRG-IJEMS), 5(12), 8-15.
King, E., & Ozler, B. (1998). What’s decentralization got to do with learning? The case of Nicaragua’s school autonomy reform. Development Economics Research Group, Working Paper Series on Impact Evaluation of Education Reforms, 9, 278200-1099079877269.
Thalut, N., Fonchamnyo, D. C., & Sama, M. C. (2020). Financial Inclusion, Community Capacity Building and Pro-Wildlife Conservation Behavior around the Northern Periphery of Dja Biosphere Reserve, Cameroon. Journal of Socioeconomics and Development, 3(1), 47-62.
Treisman, D. (2000). Decentralization and inflation: Commitment, collective action, or continuity. American Political Science Review, 837-857.
Von Braun, J., & Grote, U. (2002). Does decentralization serve the poor? Managing fiscal decentralization, 92-119.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Moses Abit Ofeh, Nashipu Thalut
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
