Treaty defines the principle of subsidiary in the following way:“The Community shall act within the limits of the powers conferred upon by this Treaty and of the objectives as signed to it therein. In areas which do not fall within its exclusive competence, the Community shall take action, in accordance with the principle of subsidiary, only if and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be su ciently achieved by the Member States and can therefore, by reason of the scale or e ects of the proposed action, be better achieved by the community…Any action by the Community shall not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives of this Treaty”. This principle is developed and used also within the states on achieving the better results through power sharing with citizens, according to European Charter of Local Self Government(1985).³ There has been vast research on the decentralization process both in terms of its e ects on peace-building as well as its fiscal implications. Research on decentralization in Kosovo is a well-treated area, and much of the research carries a very critical tone of the process of decentralization. Ebel and Peteri edited a Guidebook on Decentralization in Kosovo,(2007) making a good step on providing the best experiences by number of researchers. Monteux (2006) assesses the decentralization process in Macedonia, Bosnia and its prospects in Kosovo and concludes that this tool might in fact not be as e cient in building peace as has been hoped. Monteux constructs a very interesting theoretical typology on decentralization which we will utilize in our analysis and based on that construct, there is a path for the indicators and for the data collection in order to enable a bridge between theory and practice. Likewise papers written by Boskosvka(2010), Todorovski(2001), assess the decentralization tool in mitigating conflict and fostering reconciliation, however they all carry a critical view of the process and its e ectiveness. Whereas the arguments made in each of these studies are insightful and provide a comprehensive view on the decentralization process in various countries, they lack quantitative data and a better view from the situation on the ground. The praises or criticisms of the process are based on normative and qualitative basis which will help us in our analysis, however in order to inform policies, quantitative and tangible data is also needed. Horvath edition(2000 vol.1) compared the local government characteristics of ex European socialist countries and process of decentralization after the systemic transformation. Definition of the decentralization is elaborated by Crook and Manor(1998) and others as transfer of powers from central government to lower levels in a political-administrative and territorial hierarchy. KIPRED(2009) analysis stated that decentralization is fundamental for the stability of Kosovo as a state and the sustainability 3 European Charter of Local Self Government, http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/122.htm