| |
Debate
Interview with Simon Maxwell: "It makes sense to channel money through the EU”
Comment 1: The true meaning of good governance
Comment 2: Doha: The trade of unbelievers
8-9/2006 |
|
[ Comment ]
The true meaning of good governance
“Good governance” is a term used to distinguish successful from unsuccessful cases of development assistance. However, there is no generally accepted definition of good governance. In development practice, the expression is often interpreted as pertaining only to a government's economic management. However, donors should also emphasise issues such as participation and transparency, even if doing so makes cooperation more difficult.
[ By Heribert Weiland ]
Good governance has been a key concept in the development debate for the past 15 years. No other term is referred to as often when assessing the results of donor engagement. Similarly, good governance is often presented as a magic formula that contributes to the success of programmes and projects, or at least explains their failure. Of course, no matter how well development interventions are planned, they will only achieve the desired effects if overall political conditions are favourable, public authorities act effectively and efficiently, the rule of law is respected and power exercised responsibly. Accordingly, where this is not the case, all available means for creating more favourable conditions must be mobilised.
Which brings us to the problem: what exactly are “favourable conditions” and how are they to be established? Do all partners involved in development cooperation define good governance in the same way and attach the same importance to it? Do differences in culture or political systems between donor and recipient countries obstruct a meaningful application of the term?
In practice, in the vast majority of cases good governance is interpreted solely in terms of economic management, even though the concept itself is far more comprehensive. The model promoted by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund assumes a competent state that manages its budget efficiently and sets carefully targeted political and financial incentives for the private sector. In many developing countries, the political dimensions of good governance – participation, transparency and democratisation – are so sensitive that they are ignored in the development dialogue for reasons of political opportunism.
Many partner countries can be classified as semi-authoritarian, particularly in Africa and the Middle East. True, the ruling elites do pay lip service to good governance. However, they are unwilling to tolerate outside interference in established power relations and privileges. For example, unless accompanied by adequate funding, decentralisation measures by themselves will not strengthen the decision-making powers of regional and municipal authorities. And what use are laws that guarantee freedom of the media if members of the relevant state supervisory authorities are not chosen democratically?
By emphasising good governance, development policymakers perform a balancing act. Unjust regimes that persistently violate human rights, such as Zimbabwe, are denied development assistance, whereas in functioning democracies such as Botswana or Namibia, one can, by and large, speak of good governance. In many countries, however, the picture is not so clear-cut, and the question of conditionality arises. Should support measures be continued when opposition groups are suppressed, elections rigged and judges corrupt? If projects are intended to help disadvantaged groups, it would surely be wrong to withdraw too early in cases of “bad governance”. However, it would be just as wrong to keep silent for reasons of opportunism.
We must insist upon good governance even if doing so gives rise to politically or diplomatically awkward situations. Unfortunately, aid agencies (both governmental and non-governmental) sometimes attach greater importance to institutional survival than the responsible promotion of good governance. Regardless of how imprecise and overused the term may be in academic discussion, the normative aspect of good governance provides development policymakers with a new tool they should stick to.
Prof. Dr. Heribert Weiland
is general manager of the Arnold Bergstraesser Institute for Cultural Research in Freiburg. heribert.weiland@abi.uni-freiburg.de
|
