Zambezia (1975-6), 4 (ii).ESSAY REVIEWLOCAL GOVERNMENT IN SOUTHERN AFRICATHE NUMBER OF publications banned in South Africa is legion. Running aclose second Š or so it often seems to this reviewer Š is the growing numberof titles about that country and its neighbours which, under pretext of scholar-ship are, in fact, compounded of superficial analysis and blinkered partisan-ship," The volume reviewed here2 is not likely to be banned (although it de-serves to be for the appalling number of printing errors), but I have nohesitation in consigning it, firmly, to the second category. A mere catalogueof the book's defects would make for poor reading, admittedly, and would ex-pose the reviewer to the charge of compounding the felony, so to speak; butlocal government has a prouder history and a deeper significance than willever be apparent if one's reading is restricted to this volume.3There is a more personal interest that has helped me to struggle throughthese bland, boring and ill-conceived chapters, and still feel disposed to writeabout them afterwards. In 1970 the editors invited me to contribute a chapteron local government in Rhodesia. Local government in a number of formscertainly existed in Rhodesia, but virtually nothing beyond formal descriptionof certain municipalities had been published, and a search of the NationalArchives in Salisbury revealed hardly anything of contemporary relevance.To produce one relatively short chapter, therefore, would have required amajor project, which the publishers' deadline precluded. I remained veryinterested, nevertheless, in the volume that would emerge, particularly as thestate of knowledge and research about local government elsewhere in SouthernAfrica seemed similar to that described with regard to Rhodesia.I had thought, naively, that the editors shared these concerns; it is nowobvious that they had a different agenda in mind. Nevertheless the title in-vites one to take the book at its face value, and ask how successful it is asan attempt to survey the general characteristics of local government in tendifferent countries. It is immediately apparent that the very scheme of thebook has a fundamental flaw. The editors have insisted on including some-thing on each country (although Angola and Mozambique are lumped togetheras 'Portuguese Africa'), and something on all past and present institutions oflocal government and administration worthy of the name within them.This intention is then qualified by their policy of dividing South Africaand Rhodesia into 'White' and 'Black' areas, and giving a rough equality of1 To take two recent examples, A. Humbaraci and N. Muchnik, Portugal's AfricanWars (London, Macmillan, 1974) and P. Joyce, Anatomy of a Rebel: Smith of Rhodesia(Salisbury, Graham Publishing, 1974).2 W. B. Vosloo, D. A. Kotze and W. J. O. Jeppe (eds), Local Government inSouthern Africa (Pretoria. Academia, 1974), 291pp. Rh$10.35.3 As evidence one could select A. Maas (ed.) Area and Power (Glencoe. The FreePress, 1959) ; R. Wraith, Local Administration in West Africa (London, G. Allen andUnwin, 2nd edit., 1972) ; and L. J. Sharpe, 'Theories and values of local government',Political Studies (1970). 18, 153-74. The New Local Authorities: Management andStructure. Report of a Study Group , . . (London, H.M.S.O., 1972), illustrates con-temporary ideas about local government organisation.107108ESSAY REVIEWspace to each category. Presumably the object was to achieve some kindof balance with the unspoken premise of a 'balanced view'. The results, how-ever, disclose just the opposite. Vosloo on South West Africa cannot findanything about local government specifically, until the fourteenth of the nine-teen pages making up his chapter, and even then his attention is devotedalmost entirely to urban institutions in a predominantly rural country.Kotze on contemporary Lesotho has no more to offer: 'Responsible electedlocal government' in the shape of district councils established in 1959, wasabolished in 1968, and 'urban areas are so diminutive that they are unableto support local authorities financially'; the rather lame conclusion follows that'no devolution of powers is envisaged by the government' (pp.120, 125). Alengthier and more critical examination of Swaziland bv I. E, Butler reachesan equally damaging conclusion: 'In particular rural local government quiteapart from the political difficulties described (changes would be stronglyopposed by the Swazi National Council and chiefs) cannot progress. In-dependent Swaziland is still finding its feet and it is not clear to what extentchanges proposed will be acceptable' (pp. 180-1).Even more disastrous is the chapter on the then Portuguese territories,where the institutions of colonial rule, described verv inadequately bv J. L.Torres, hardly fit the editors' definition of 'a local political process analyticallyseparate from the nation-wide political process', And Tin matter that there isno attempt to bring material up to date. i.e. beyond 1960, or to acquaint thereader with the work of municipal councils in the larger towns of Ansola andMocamb'que as reported in local newspapers. No matter that only the mostgeneral description, and one that can be found from reading the appropriatelegislation, has been provided. Sornethi.ns: has been said about two of thelargest countries in Southern Africa and that is what matters to the editors.Yet the truth about local government is that it flourishes in some coun-nes. and in parts of one country, and is dormant or defunct in others; even ageneral survey of its characteristics ought to give expression to these differ-ences in some logical manner.Part of the trouble is that none of the editors, nor of the other contribu-tors, appear to have been members or officials of any representative Joc^lgovernment body, and so have never been responsible (at whatever level ofauthority) to some group of people for carrying out local services. Some ex-periences of th's sort would have generated a feel for the 'stuff' of localgovernment politics and processes that is totally absent from the volume.We never learn how a local authority works, what sort of people are members,what the local inhabitants (of any race or nationality) think about their ownadministration, or even what the central governments themselves think aboutit. AH these aspects, mark you, are descriptive, and do not involve 'theories*Š something that the editors eschew. In short, who (again, of »nv r«ce ornationality) after reading the book would be interested in participating inlocal government, let alone be led to believe that any of the variety of systemspresented here offers anything of value for political, social or economicdevelopment?Not that I am castigating the editors because of some failure to recognisethe prescriptive side to public administration. Indeed these three Afrikaneracademics cannot be faulted on that score, their dislike of 'theory' notwith-stand:ng. The medicine is clearly labelled, and the signature is not hard todecipher. South Africa is divided into 'White' and 'Black' areas, a naturalphenomenon that finds expression in t^e Renublic's political institutions.1 he 'Black' areas are the Bantu Homelands within which the development oflocal administrative bodies foreshadows complete separation from the restof the country as sovereign, independent states. The Transkei is far advancedA. J. DiXON109along the path already, Bophutatswana less so but with the same goal inmind. Both will take their place as 'Black-ruled' areas, alongside Lesotho,Botswana and other former colonial territories. Or so the argument runs, theargument for separate development that is. To supply some intellectualcredibility for this policy is the task of the Stellenbosch alumni, and hencethe real purpose of this book. Of course the editors know very well that thedevelopment of genuine local bodies ŠŁ representative, financially viableand with wills of their own4 Š is not a high priority for the rulers of Swazi-land, Rhodesia or Zambia. The highly centralised nature of decision-makingin these regimes is too well known. Nor can the editors be unaware that theinstitutions in the region showing the closest resemblance to such a modelare the White-run municipalities of Johannesburg, Durban, Cape Town andSalisbury, which have administrative capability, financial strength and politicalinfluence quite beyond the imaginings of any of those 'native1 authorities towhich this book devotes so much of its attention.Despite its title and list of contents, this is not a book that has verymuch to do with local government. What concerns the editors is SouthAfrican politics and in particular the Nationalist Government's apartheidpolicy. In Vosloo's own words:Generally speaking it seems that the development of local self-government of Natives residing in white urban areas is designed toproceed within the framework of the South African government'spolicy in terms of which political rights and power must beexercised by the Native groups within their respective homelandsand not within the area of the white group (p. 117).Exactly. Or one can make a check on the type of sources relied on by thenine contributors, and discover that expressions of public opinion and groupinterests Š as recorded in Parliament, press or the proceedings of the localauthorities themselves Š have been almost totally ignored. The one referenceto South African Parliamentary proceedings cited in the text concerns 'BantuAreas' and was made 24 years ago. Administration is a matter of implement-ing the lav/: institutions have validity only in so far as they continue to giveeffect to the law. For the Afrikaner theoretician, as for his Marxist counter-part, ideology is everything, the individual nothing.Local government cannot guarantee individual liberty. Nor can it claimmuch success in the fields of economic and social development, as recentexperience in Botswana demonstrates.5 And its costs are high: a supply offinance, and manpower, and technical and administrative expertise that fewdeveloping countries can afford, a degree of autonomy and diversity thatonly the more representative of governments can allow. Rather, the rulingparty is likely to favour local-level institutions for what these may contributeto national strength and the reinforcement of their own position. For, if thereis one common goal that binds these nine disparate regimes of Southern Africatogether, it is survival Š whether for the protection of a privileged elite, con-solidating a tenuous legitimacy, or simply, pace President Banda, keepingafloat. Given these centralising tendencies, it is too much to expect localgovernment to do anything except hold its own in the (mainly) urban4 See A. H. Marshall, Local Government in the Modern World (London, AthkmePress, 1965), 5.s W. Tordoff, 'Local administration in Botswana', Journal of Administration Over-seas (1973), 12, 1972-83; (1974), 13, 293-304.lidESSAY REVIEWenvironment. By so doing, it will continue to demonstrate that im-portant societal values are enshrined within its mundane processes: participa-tion, reconciliation of interests, community self-reliance, the sharing of powernot its monopoly.6 It may be worth remembering that back in 1963, theMunicipal Council of Bulawayo took the initiative in recommending electedAfrican representation to its membership, and the creation of one communityout of a racially-divided population.7 Nothing was forthcoming because theGovernment could not tolerate local alternatives to national policy. Yetadministration without the possibility of choice is an invitation to incom-petence, repression and, ultimately, self-destruction.University of the South PacificA. J. DIXONe See Sharpe, 'Theories and values of local government'.7 G. G. Passmore, Local Government Legislation in Southern Rhodesia (Salisbury,Univ. Coll. of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, 1966), 8-9.