Service Delivery versus Moonlighting: Using Data from Kenya, Uganda,
Tanzania and Senegal
Kjell Hausken and Mthuli Ncube
Striking the proper balance between allocating resources into service delivery for low income which beneﬁts society,
and moonlighting elsewhere for additional income, is a challenge. A model is developed for how this balance is struck. When the
moonlighting production function is concave, common with good governmental monitoring, an internal equilibrium exists. Otherwise
either service delivery or moonlighting arises. The model is applied to teachers and healthcare workers within education and
healthcare. Survey data from Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Senegal show classroom absence for teachers at 29–52.5 per cent, and
facility absence for healthcare workers 20–46 per cent. The model is calibrated against the empirics to assess and quantify the factors
driving such results. The factors are the shape of the moonlighting production function which governs alternatives to service delivery,
the unit cost of service delivery relative to moonlighting for teachers and healthcare workers, and the salaries for service delivery.
Many populations especially in the third world and especially at the local level suffer poor service delivery due to inefﬁciency or
low effort exerted by those responsible. Possible explanations are lack of monitoring, poor institutional frameworks, and that
salaries for service delivery may be low. Furthermore, unit costs of service delivery may be high compared with the costs of
exerting alternative efforts, which may be easily available. For example, data shows that teachers in Tanzania teach around two
hours per day, which is 40 per cent of the time required, and healthcare workers in Senegal spend 39 minutes per day with patients.
Teachers and healthcare workers are good examples of professionals delivering a service to their communities. They are often,
but not necessarily, publicly employed. They also often earn, or believe that they earn, too low salaries, for example, when
comparing with other professions with comparable education. Despite their idealism, these professionals may supplement their
income through alternative efforts, referred to as moonlighting. Examples are private teaching and taxi driving.
A model is developed where an actor allocates his resources into service delivery and moonlighting. Service delivery beneﬁts
society but often gives too low income. The actor thus often moonlights elsewhere for additional income, which may be
economically beneﬁcial for the actor, but detrimental for society. How actors strike this balance is a challenge within many
occupations designed to enhance some public good. Resources are labour supply, competence, skills, training, and so on.
Moonlighting is interpreted broadly, requiring only that some alternative income is somehow generated. Both kinds of efforts
provide salary according to different logics. The two research questions are to determine the optimal balance to be struck
between service delivery or moonlighting, and which factors impact this balance. Examples of factors are unit cost of service
delivery relative to moonlighting, salary for service delivery relative to moonlighting, and the shape of the production function
The authors acknowledge data from the World Bank, the African Economic Research Consortium, and the African Development Bank, on service
delivery in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Senegal.
Kjell Hausken (corresponding author), Professor, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Stavanger, 4036 Stavanger, Norway; Tel.: þ47 51
831632, fax: þ47 51 831550, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org. Mthuli Ncube, Professor, Managing Director and Head of Quantum Global Research Lab
Ltd, Bahnhofstrasse 2, CH 6300 Zug, Switzerland; e-mail: email@example.com.
African Development Review, Vol. 30, No. 2, 2018, 219–232
© 2018 The Authors. African Development Review © 2018 African Development Bank. Published by Blackwell Publishing Ltd,
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.