Community development has been defined as "a process where community members come

together to take collective action and generate solutions to common problems." (McConnell,
2002:13). It is a broad term given to the practices of civic leaders, activists, involved citizens
and professionals to improve various aspects of communities, typically aiming to build stronger
and more resilient local communities (Rubin & Rubin, 2008). There are a number of models that
have been applied in community development such as Social Cash Transfers, Ujamaa in
Tanzania and the Constituency Development Fund. Of interest, this work will concentrate on
discussing the Constituency Development Funds (CDF) in terms of the following aspects:

1) Discuss the origin nature goals and objectives of the constituency development fund as a
community development model.
2) Identify, explain and analyze the dominant community development theories and
approaches used.
3) What are its successes, failures and challenges in fostering community development?

The origin, nature, goals and objectives of the constituency development funds

Equitable distribution of resources in a society is necessary, since this helps reduce the level of
poverty in the given society. This is an understanding that is today realized by most countries in
the world, both developed and developing. However, in most countries resources still remain
unevenly distributed. Various strategies have been put on place by governments globally, to
realize this aim. One such strategy is the setting up of development funds at local government
level or constituency level. These are called Constituent Development Funds (CDF). According
to the Centre for International Development (2009), Constituency Development Funds (CDFs)
represent a development policy framework that seeks to meet the immediate social needs of local
communities and are operational in nearly twenty-three (23) countries. In Africa, these countries
include Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe Malawi, Kenya, Ghana, Liberia, Nigeria,
Rwanda, Namibia and Southern Sudan. From Asia, these countries are Bhutan, Malaysia, Nepal,
Pakistan, Mongolia and India. Others are Honduras, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, Philippines,
and Solomon Islands. In all these aforementioned countries, CDFs represent locally-based
development funding provisions that channel money from central government directly to
electoral constituencies for local infrastructure projects. Nonetheless, the form of CDF differs,

1
both between and sometimes even within, countries, in terms of the amount, allocation principles
and utilization.

In Malawi, for example, CDFs is meant to respond to immediate, short-term community

development needs and ensure that rural development spreads evenly throughout the country. In
Kenya the rationale of CDF is to promote development and alleviate poverty at constituency
level; communities with the opportunity to make choices and implement (MPs) projects that
maximise their welfare in line with their needs and preferences. However, questions have been
raised over whether CDF actually represents efforts to spur local development and consequently
national development, or whether it is primarily a political project aimed at benefitting MPs by
providing them with the resources to help them gain popularity with the electorate (Gikonyo,
2008). In Uganda, CDF is meant to address poverty at the grassroots level, where other
government poverty reduction policies have not been able to succeed more fully; In Jamaica, it is
to promote human and infrastructure development at the community and constituency levels and
to empower the Members of Parliament to respond to the needs and priorities articulated by their
constituents, thereby achieving improved governance at the local level.
The rationale for CDF in Zambia is to provide MPs and their constituent communities with the
opportunity to make choices and implement projects that maximize their welfare in line with
their needs and preferences. It was established in order to assist MPs in implementing
development projects so that they can financially contribute to development projects as they have
no finances to do so. The incumbent MP is empowered to manage the CDF within the
framework of some guidelines. The Guidelines on the Utilisation and Management of the
Constituency Development Fund were introduced by the Ministry of Local Government and
Housing in the absence of specific legislation to guide the use of CDF (Ministry of Local
Government and Housing, 2006).

The projects to qualify for funding under CDF are to be developmental in nature and are
supposed to be beneficial to various stakeholders in the district. It should be noted that project
selection is very critical for the success of any developmental project. Projects which are
financed by the CDF are preliminarily chosen by constituency development committee (CDC)
and local community (MoLGH, 2006). CDF guidelines provide a range of projects that are
eligible to receive funding. Broadly speaking, projects eligible to receive funding include water

2
supply and sanitation, roads, agriculture, education and health, social amenities, sports and
recreation and other economic activities. CDF guidelines give a lot of flexibility in terms of
project eligibility. However, qualifying conditions that the local communities consider critical
could justify utilization of the CDF on such projects and programmes.

Therefore it can be noted that the objectives of Constituency Development Fund (CDF) is to
deliver goods and services directly to constituents by providing additional funds for local
community development, outside line ministries. It is predominantly a developing country policy
that is intended to meet the immediate social needs of local communities. In countries where it is
operational, CDF is appropriated by Parliament within a country’s national budget. For instance,
CDF in Zambia was introduced in 1995 for the implementation of community based projects
which would in the long term improve the socio-economic wellbeing of the constituents. The
stated objective of the CDF in Zambia is to provide Members of Parliament and their
constituents with funds for community development.

The dominant community development theories and approaches used.

There are certain approaches that are used in administering CDFs. For instance when the funds
are released, there is an aspect of involving the people in a given constituency so that funds are
utilized in the most transparent manner. The level of community participation in identification,
implementation and monitoring of local development projects therefore, ought to be high when
an appropriate institutional and regulatory framework is in place. This is very important in
shaping procedures as well as ensuring and protecting the participatory right of community
people in local development projects. The institutional and regulatory framework provides the
structures with a mechanism to disseminate the right information. Information dissemination
affects community knowledge and awareness. But with or without knowledge, participation is
also influenced by people’s attitudes and interests. Therefore, with a positive attitude, with the
right information and knowledge, and the availability of structures and an institutional
framework, there will be more participation in the transparent utilization of funds (Hickey,
2010).
The benefits of involving local people in decision making and implementation in general and
local development projects in particular are, therefore that ; local people will have a great amount
of experience and insight into what works for them, what does not work for them, and why. They

3
(local people) will be given the necessary knowledge local development projects which will
make them be able to contribute to the success of the project. Involving local people will help to
increase the resources available for the programme, promote self-help and self-reliance, and
improve trust and partnership between the community and the project staff and that the projects
implemented will likely address their (local people’s) needs. Involving local people in
development projects will make them guard jealously infrastructure as they will consider them
their own. This, to a larger extent, is likely to reduce vandalism of the infrastructure in their
respective communities (Baskin, 2010).

Besides, different theories are used when allocating CDFs. These theories include the social
action theory, social systems theory and decentralization theory. These three theories are used as
they usually complement each other in studying people’s perceptions and participation in CDF
projects, their performance and socio-economic impacts. Social action theory is used to study
how communities perceive CDF and whether communities can take action by demanding proper
utilization of CDF monies or raising questions about CDF projects. Social system theory is used
to understand the accelerators of CDF and how the different actors involved in the CDF projects
interact to influence the performance of CDF projects. Decentralization theory is used to study
the impacts of CDF projects on the well-being of the communities by bringing services closer to
the people and by ensuring that communities have more opportunities to participate in the CDF
decision making.

Social Action Theory

The social action theory has been used in community work in political education of powerless
people to bring about their active participation in local politics. Social action is based on
inventive, creative non-violent and disruption as a way of identifying the collective power that
poor people have to force corporations and authorities to change. The theory is based on the
belief that grassroots political activism should bring about the reform of powerful institution
(Rubin & Rubin, 2008). The social action theory is therefore relevant to in this case given the
political economic aspects and the issue of community participation embedded in the CDFs
projects. The theory is useful because it helps us understand how people’s participation can
ensure better management of CDF. This theory is useful because it suggests that individuals need

4
to take action by demanding their rights. Perhaps if they do so, it would lead to a more effective
utilization of CDF.
The Social Systems Theory
Parsons (1961), noted that systems like society have functional prerequisites. Parsons presents
four basic functions that all social systems must perform if they are to persist. These are
adaptation, which refers to relationship between social system and how it adapts to environment;
goal attainment which concerns requirements for societies to establish and achieve certain
objectives; integration which is the capacity to regulate conflicting situations and pattern
maintenance which relates to upholding patterns of values thereby maintaining stability of social
system; and Latency which is the problem of creating, preserving, and transmitting the system's
distinctive culture and values (Parsons, 1960). CDF may be seen as involving the four aspects:
Adaptation – it is oriented to increasing productivity. Goal attainment- it is about attainment of
political goals by the government agencies, Integration- CDF requires Integration and
cooperation of different organizations such as political parties, churches NGOs, Latency –even
as we use CDF to achieve community development, we need a maintenance local organizations
and methods of local resource mobilization.
Decentralization Theoretical Perspective
Decentralization is meant to minimize state interventions. It is meant to bring numerous
improvements such as democratization, more efficient administration, more effective
development and good governance. Decentralization is also supposed to bring services closer to
the citizens who have more opportunities to participate in the decision making process of policies
and activities than in centrally decided ones (Baskin, 2010). If people participate in CDFs
projects, it can lead to improvement of community development projects and people can
scrutinize those projects more keenly and closely than when the projects are undertaken by the
central government. CDF is supposed to encourage participatory development by encouraging
people to participate in the identification and implementation of projects. If communities
participate, they will feel more ownership of the CDF projects
Decentralization theory is therefore used because it is essentially horizontal distribution of power
and resources from the central government to lower levels of management. As a process of
decentralization CDFs may be understood as a set of policy reforms aimed at transferring
responsibilities of use of resources from the higher to lower levels of government- the

5
constituency. In this aspect, the theory is used to understand the decentralization of resources for
community development (Mukwena, 2004).
Successes, failures and challenges in fostering community development.
The successes of CDFs - CDFs have been used to fund a variety of local development projects,
e.g. classroom blocks, sink boreholes, the construction of small access roads, markets etc.
thereby contributing to poverty reduction in communities. For instance, the majority of positive
experiences of CDF in Zambia and cases demonstrating better use of funds can be seen in
constituencies where transparency and participation were key elements of the CDF process.

Choma prison clinic in Choma central constituency is an example of a project where

transparency and community participation were exercised in the CDF process. The small clinic,
originally designed for the exclusive use of inmates, started to provide services to local people as
the community grew. The poor service provided at the clinic led the community to hold a public
meeting to discuss extending its premises and expanding its services; a project committee was
appointed as a result. A local district councillor explained to the project committee the purpose
and process of applying to the CDF and this led to a successful funding application. The project
was also supported by the Ministry of Health which seconded additional staff and helped with
procuring building materials. The project was completed on schedule and the clinic now provides
additional services, including antenatal screening, for eight communities.

Still in Zambia, and particularly in Mongu central constituency, a market was built successfully
in one of the local townships known as Imwiko. It was all thanks to the CDFs that the market is
in operational now and serving quite a good number of marketers. The CDFs was also used to
erect a bridge on the Luena river in Kaoma central constituency. Besides a number of secondary
schools in western province such as Mandanga, Kanyonyo and Imwiko have been built all using
the CDFs.

These are just few of the many successes of CDFs in Zambia fostering community development.
Important to note is the fact that transparency and community participation were evident
throughout this process: i) Participation in identifying projects: in each case the community
identified the project and appointed the project committee at a public meeting. That project
committee then made the application to the CDF committee on behalf of the community.

6
Community involvement in project implementation: community members contributed labour and
materials.

Failures and challenges - Review of literature around CDF in both Zambia and regionally
reveals a number of common weaknesses or faults in the implementation of CDF. Poor
community knowledge of CDF influencing the ability of projects to address grass roots needs;
Poor supporting guidelines and support for how CDF should be utilized leading to a multitude of
approaches and lack of consistency and efficiency; Late release of funds affecting project
implementation; Poor quality projects due to low quality labour and materials, and lack of
monitoring; Lack of sanctions against offences or misuse; and Weak auditing processes to
effectively assess the utilisation of the fund (Malama, 2009).

Lack of transparency in many cases, is one other failure as well as challenge of CDFs. For
example in Zambia, the Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ) and Micah Challenge Zambia
conducted joint research, with the support of Tearfund, to establish how transparency and
participation in the use of the Constituency Development Fund impacted service delivery. The
research was carried out in 11 constituencies in six provinces of Zambia between October and
December 2012. The research found numerous challenges associated with the CDF and which
need to be addressed, if it is to have the impact on development. Intended among these
challenges were, lack of transparency in CDF processes led to reduced community participation
and the loss of funds and materials, awareness of the CDF guidelines was mainly limited to those
involved in the CDF process, rather than the wider community. There was a lack of transparency
in decision-making as CDF committees did not provide citizens with detailed explanations as to
why certain projects were funded or rejected. The procurement of CDF materials was not
transparent, arousing suspicion. In most constituencies, the local authorities did not use the
suppliers or materials suggested in the CDF application and did not provide an explanation for
their choice of supplier. The study found a lack of community participation in the majority of
CDF processes, which often resulted in unfinished or inappropriate projects: In some cases,
citizens were not aware of CDF procedures or involved in identifying CDF projects. This led to
inappropriate CDF projects which were unwanted and left unused.

MPs have also been accused of using CDF as slush funds to reward cronies and punish perceived
opponents. CDF committees are invariably staffed by MPs’ cronies and henchmen.

7
Unsurprisingly, there have been allegations that MPs use the CDF to further their political
ambitions. The CDF becomes the money given to the Member of Parliament to appreciate those
that voted for him.’ Community members usually perceive that MPs ‘change the way they
handle the CDF’ in order to safeguard their parliamentary seat. This erodes trust in
parliamentarians and undermines strong and effective governance (Malama, 2009).

Another study by the Economic Association of Zambia (EAZ) 2011 also observed that because
of the desire by local politicians to get a share of every CDF allocation, many projects are
usually given funding in phases, a situation which has resulted in an array of uncompleted
projects. Effective monitoring and financial accountability of these projects is adversely affected.
Income-generating projects, especially for women’s groups, such as chicken rearing and
tailoring, are the most notorious with regard to failure and the lack of financial accountability.

One other notable challenge with the CDF is the mode of disbursal. CDFs is disbursed equally to
all constituencies when they differ significantly in terms of geographical size, population and
levels of poverty (Hickey, 2010). Constituencies in rural areas lack basic necessities such as
adequate access to social amenities. Urban constituencies, in contrast, are better placed, in terms
of developmental opportunities and levels of economic activity. Yet under the CDF because
there is no attempt to take account of different levels of deprivation and poverty, each
constituency receives the same amount of funding. The current allocation means that a
constituency such as Kabwata in Lusaka where only 1% of its population is without access to
proper water supply gets the same level of funding as Sikongo in Western Province one of the
deprived constituency, where 91% of its population lack access to water supply. Under the
current allocation, Sikongo given its high developmental needs has the same amount of funds to
address these challenges as Kabwata which needs less funding to provide water to the 1%
without water. That’s why there is now a call for a needs-based approach when disbursing these
funds.

CONCLUSION

CDFs is intended to help constituencies in Zambia meet their development challenges and is
disbursed annually to all constituencies. The CDF has evolved to become an important
developmental tool for constituencies and has grown. Constituencies use the fund to deliver

8
certain services including construction of roads, bridges and health posts. Implementation CDFs
has encountered a number of operational and structural challenges amongst, which include poor
community participation and contribution to projects, low community participation in identification,
implementation and monitoring of CDF, lack of coordinated development within and across
constituencies, corruption (embezzlement is a more appropriate term) and MPs’ misuse. A bigger
problem is corruption and the challenge is how to stem the corruption and ensure that the funds
get used properly as intended.

REFERENCES

Baskin, M. (2010). Constituency Development Funds (CDFs) as a Tool of Decentralized

Development, Overview Paper, State University of New York Center for International
Development (SUNY/CID), September 2010.

Centre for International Development (2009), Constituency Development Funds Workshop,

Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany, State University of New
York December 8-9, 2009.

Economics Association of Zambia (EAZ), (2011). Impact of the Constituency Development

Fund in Zambia.

Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia (EFZ), (2013). Constituency Development Fund:

Transparency in Grassroots Development or Political Patronage, Tearfund and Micah Challenge.

Gikonyo, Wanjiru (2008). “The CDF Social Audit Guide.” Open Society Initiative for East
Africa: Nairobi, Kenya.

Hickey, A., (2010). Constituency Development Funds: Scoping Paper, International Budget
Partnership, Washington, DC.

Malama, K. (2009). The Utilisation of Constituency Development Funds (CDFs) in Kabwata: A

Participatory Communicative Appraisal‟. Master of Communication for Development
Dissertation, The University of Zambia, Lusaka

9
McConnell, Charlie, (2002). Community Learning and Development: The Making of an
Empowering Profession. Community Learning Scotland/PAULO.

Ministry of Local Government and Housing, (2006). Guidelines on the Management and
Utilisation of Constituency Development Fund, Republic of Zambia.

Mukwena, R. M. (2004) ‘Situating Decentralization in Zambia in a Political Context’, African

Training and Research Centre in Administration for Development.

Parsons, T. (1961). The Social System. New York: The Free Press.

Rubin, J. H, & Rubin, I. S. (2008) Community Organizing and Development. Boston Pearson
Education Inc.

10