8 specifications, and how it Is maintained and utilized, depends largely upon who is responsible for these decisions, and what "responsibility means in this context. The next two sections briefly introduce some of the many dimensions of decentrlization: what is it (many things), why do so many people advomate it(for many different and often incompadble reasons), and what are its imrlications for infrastructure (it depends)? Tae fourth sectioa of the paper bnefly sketches a framework for considenng infrastructure investments in a decentralized setting and, as summarzed in a brief concluding section, suggests some ~,uiding principles for dealing with the many and divere issues that may arise in practice. Throughout, the discussion in the body of the paper is .ipported by a number of "boxes that develop a few aspects of the argumnent in more detail and illustrate some of the points made in the text by brief case studies.

# The Many Faces of Decentralization

'Decentralization' is a slippery term. One way to pin its mear;ng down is to distinguish three varieties of decentralization as measured by the degree of independent decision-making exercised at the local leve. peco,en means the dispersion of responsibilities within a central governmen **t** o regional branch offices: while clzarly relevant with respect to some infrastructural investments, this variety of decentralization is not fmrther discussed here. In contrast, delem tin refers to a situation in which local governments act as agents for the central government, executing certain functions on its behalf, while devoluton refers to a situation in which not only implementation bnt also the authority to decide what is done is in the hands of local governments. How one views the effects of decentralization on infrastructurm depends in part upon whether one is thinng of delegation or devolution. Unless exactly the same people face cxactly the same incentives in both situations - which iS hardly possible - the outcomes of the two varieties of decentralization are likely to differ shar' y.

# The Benefits and Costs of Decentalization

How one evaluates such differing outcomes depends both upon the nature of the investment in question and upon whether one focuses on the intnnsic or the instrumental aspects of dcxentralization. The literature is replete with passages praising the virtues of decentralization.4 Not only will it produce more efficient and equitable service delivery through making better use of local knowledge, but it will also lead to greater participation and democracy resulting in more popular consent to government and hence improved political stability. When to these good qualities are added such further ascribed virtues as increased resource mobilization and reduced strain on central finances, greater accountability, and more responsive and responsible govemment in general, it is not surprising thiat some have seen decentalization in and of itself to be intrinsically valuable.

' The particular list that follows is based on the discussion in four reent intems. Bank documz a (on Aex.zo, Nigeria, Indonesia, and Venezuela, respectively) but it could be replicated many times from many sources.