how to achieve good governance essay

Press ESC to close

Or check our popular categories....

Home » Public Administration » Good Governance: The Key to Effective Public Administration

Good Governance: The Key to Effective Public Administration

I. introduction.

Good governance is the process by which a government directs and controls the affairs of a state or organization in a transparent, accountable, and participatory manner. It is a crucial element of public administration, as it ensures that the government is able to effectively and efficiently deliver services and meet the needs of its citizens.

Definitions of Good Governance

Good governance is a concept that has been widely discussed and debated in the fields of politics, economics, and international development. There is no one definition of good governance that is universally accepted, but it generally refers to the fair, transparent, and accountable management of a country or organization. Some common characteristics of good governance include transparency, accountability, responsiveness, consensus-oriented decision-making, equity and inclusiveness, and effectiveness and efficiency.

Here are a few well-known definitions of good governance:

The World Bank defines good governance as “the manner in which power is exercised in the management of a country’s economic and social resources for development.”
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) defines good governance as “the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises the mechanisms, processes and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences.”
The African Union defines good governance as “the participation of all people in the decision-making process of their country, the transparency of the decision-making process, the accountability of the authorities, and the rule of law.”
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) defines good governance as “the exercise of political, economic and administrative authority in the public interest, in ways that are transparent, accountable, effective and responsive.”

II. Concept of Good Governance

Characteristics of good governance.

Good governance is characterized by several key traits:

Transparency: Government decisions and processes should be open and accessible to the public, with information readily available for citizens to review.
Accountability: Government officials should be held accountable for their actions and decisions, through mechanisms such as elections and oversight bodies.
Responsiveness : The government should be responsive to the needs and concerns of its citizens, and take their input into account when making decisions.
Consensus-oriented: Good governance involves seeking out and incorporating the views of all relevant stakeholders, and building consensus around decisions.
Equity and inclusiveness: Good governance ensures that all members of society, regardless of their background or social status, have an equal opportunity to participate in the decision-making process and benefit from government services.
Effectiveness and efficiency: Good governance is concerned with ensuring that resources are used in the most effective and efficient manner possible, in order to achieve the desired outcomes.

Elements of Good Governance

Good governance is made up of several key elements, including:

Rule of law: A strong legal system that is independent of political influence and ensures that laws are applied consistently and fairly is essential for good governance.
Participation: Good governance requires that all members of society have the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process, whether through elections, public consultations, or other means.
Decentralization : Allowing power to be devolved to lower levels of government or other local authorities can help to ensure that decision-making is more responsive to the needs of citizens and promotes greater participation.
Human rights: Good governance requires that the government respects and protects the human rights of its citizens.
Transparency: As mentioned above, transparency is a key characteristic of good governance. This involves making government decisions and processes open and accessible to the public, as well as ensuring that information is readily available.

III. Challenges to Good Governance

Despite its importance, good governance can be difficult to achieve and maintain. Some of the challenges that governments may face include:

Corruption: Corruption, in which government officials abuse their power for personal gain, can undermine good governance and erode public trust in the government.

Inequality: If certain groups in society are excluded or disadvantaged, it can be difficult to achieve good governance.

Lack of political will: Political leaders may not always be committed to implementing good governance practices, either due to a lack of understanding of their importance or due to other interests.

Ineffective institutions: In order for good governance to be achieved, government institutions such as the judiciary, legislature, and civil service must be effective and capable of carrying out their roles.

Lack of resources: Governments may face challenges in implementing good governance practices due to a lack of financial or human resources.

IV. Case studies of Good Governance in Action

Despite these challenges, there are many examples of good governance in action around the world. Here are two examples:

Example 1: X country’s successful implementation of transparency in government processes

X country has long been a leader in the area of transparency in government. It has implemented a number of measures to ensure that its decision-making processes are open and accessible to the public, including:

Freedom of information laws: X country has strong freedom of information laws in place, which require government agencies to make information available to the public upon request.
Open data initiatives: X country has also embraced open data initiatives, which make government data available in a machine-readable format and allow anyone to access and use it.
Online transparency portals: The government has created online transparency portals, which provide access to a wide range of information on government activities, including budgets, contracts, and laws.

These measures have helped to increase public trust in the government and ensure that citizens are able to hold the government accountable for its actions.

Example 2: Y city’s successful implementation of participatory budgeting

Y city has implemented a process called participatory budgeting, in which citizens are directly involved in deciding how to allocate a portion of the city’s budget. Each year, residents are invited to propose and vote on projects that they would like to see funded.

This process has had several benefits. It has increased public engagement and trust in the government, as citizens feel that their voices are being heard and their priorities are being taken into account. It has also helped to ensure that the city’s budget is being used to fund projects that are meaningful and important to the community.

V. Good governance and the UPSC Public Administration Optional exam

In the UPSC Public Administration Optional exam, good governance is a key topic that is tested in various ways. Here are a few examples of how good governance might be tested in the exam:

Essay questions: Candidates may be asked to write an essay on a specific aspect of good governance, such as the challenges to good governance or the importance of transparency in government.
Case studies: Candidates may be given a case study to analyze and asked to apply their knowledge of good governance principles to the situation described.
Multiple choice questions: The exam may include multiple choice questions on good governance, testing candidates’ understanding of the characteristics, elements, and challenges of good governance.

Understanding good governance is crucial for anyone preparing for the UPSC Public Administration Optional exam, as it is a fundamental element of effective public administration. In order to do well on the exam, candidates should be familiar with the key concepts and principles of good governance, as well as be able to apply this knowledge to specific situations

VI. Conclusion

In conclusion, good governance is essential for the effective and efficient functioning of public administration, and is a crucial element of the UPSC Public Administration Optional. It is characterized by traits such as transparency, accountability, and inclusiveness, and is made up of elements such as the rule of law, participation, and decentralization. Understanding good governance and its importance is essential for anyone studying public administration, as it helps to ensure that government is able to effectively serve the needs of its citizens. While challenges to good governance do exist, successful examples from around the world show that it is possible to improve governance and achieve positive results for citizens.

FAQs about good governance

Good governance is characterized by several key traits, including transparency, accountability, responsiveness, consensus-oriented decision-making, equity and inclusiveness, and effectiveness and efficiency.

The elements of good governance include the rule of law, participation, decentralization, human rights, and transparency.

Some of the challenges to good governance include corruption, inequality, lack of political will, ineffective institutions, and lack of resources.

Yes, there are many examples of good governance in action around the world. For example, some countries have successfully implemented transparency in government processes, while others have successfully implemented participatory budgeting.

We hope that this blog has provided a helpful overview of the concept of good governance and its importance in public administration. Thank you for reading!

Categorized in:

5 ways to ensure good governance

.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo{-webkit-transition:all 0.15s ease-out;transition:all 0.15s ease-out;cursor:pointer;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;outline:none;color:inherit;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:hover,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-hover]{-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo:focus,.chakra .wef-1c7l3mo[data-focus]{box-shadow:0 0 0 3px rgba(168,203,251,0.5);} Jessica Lee

.chakra .wef-9dduvl{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-9dduvl{font-size:1.125rem;}} Explore and monitor how .chakra .wef-15eoq1r{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;font-size:1.25rem;color:#F7DB5E;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-15eoq1r{font-size:1.125rem;}} Education is affecting economies, industries and global issues

A hand holding a looking glass by a lake

.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{margin-top:16px;margin-bottom:16px;line-height:1.388;color:#2846F8;font-size:1.25rem;}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-1nk5u5d{font-size:1.125rem;}} Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale

Stay up to date:.

During a recent trip to India, we met with Professor Anil Sahasrabudhe , a dynamic, positive man who will likely remind you of a favorite uncle. In 2004, he was in the less satisfactory position of being director at the College of Engineering in Pune (COEP) , located 150 km southeast of Mumbai. At that time, the institution had no financial or academic autonomy, no governance structure, and no administrative freedom. Ten years later, in 2014, the institution had turned around, garnering national awards and recognition. What helped spark the change? While several factors made an impact, Professor Sahasrabudhe mentions good governance first.

The term “good governance” often evokes the mental image of a well-functioning political system or the lack of corruption. In the case of engineering education in India, it most closely refers to the governing body that oversees a college or university. These individuals play a more important role than one might think, particularly in regard to institutional effectiveness, quality of education, and student employability.

India has nearly 4,000 engineering schools and a unique history of affiliated colleges. Affiliates are essentially child organizations of larger universities. These affiliates pay fees to the larger universities in exchange for the use of their curriculum and exams. It is not uncommon for a parent school to have more than a hundred affiliates, in fact, there is one university which has over 600! Quality control is a major challenge and students are often literally taught by textbook with a visiting lecturer reading from it.

Professor Sahasrabudhe’s COEP is one of the institutions in the World Bank-financed Technical Education Quality Improvement Project (TEQIP II) which has two major components: (i) to improve the quality of education in 190 selected institutions, some which are affiliated and some which are not; and (ii) improving system management through capacity building. Much of the money goes to updating laboratory equipment, paying student grants, providing professional development opportunities, and sponsoring cross-institutional learning workshops. But one of the “biggest bang for the buck” initiatives is that of good governance. Good governance addresses both components by ensuring that dedicated academic and non-academic leaders provide strategic vision and financial oversight, in addition to ensuring that their institutions nurture a cadre of competent faculty and employable students. In fact, the new Board of Governors at COEP was wise enough to hire Professor Sahasrabudhe, knowing how important it is to have a strong head of the institution.

Good intentions aside, it is not always easy to implement good governance practices. Many, if not all, colleges struggle with severe faculty shortages. Recent studies have shown that the number of engineering students outweigh the number of available jobs. Some colleges have governing boards that have been unable to meet for months due to scheduling conflicts and/or political instability. However, there are also several institutions like COEP that have truly embraced the fundamental principles of good governance and reaped the benefits.

Another example is the BVB College of Engineering in Hubli. Located in Karnataka, Hubli is a commercial and business center in the northern part of the state. The BVB governing board sought to actively implement good governance practices, including transparency in decision-making and developing a shared understanding of the key attributes, primary accountabilities, and performance norms of the Board of Governors. They embarked on a governance self-review (with guidelines laid out by TEQIP II) and involved all the institution’s stakeholders in the process. They identified several areas for improvement and have a plan that not only lists actionable items but also identifies which resources and actors need to play a role in order for reforms to be sustainable. Through its focus on good governance, the college has become one of the top five institutions in the state, incubated 24 companies on its campus, and created more than 400 long-term jobs in the region.

Good governance can seem somewhat of an esoteric concept – in some cases, institutions can just post a document online and make it appear that their board is very active. However, based on several case studies and firsthand experience from the TEQIP II team, some best practices for governing boards include:

A committed and engaged Board of Governors . The College of Engineering in Pune requires its members to contribute at least 100 hours to activities related to institutional development.
The right composition of individuals . Many members are appointed, and often hold more than one post. It is important to balance out the membership with motivated and diverse individuals. Conflict of interest is important to consider, especially if there are industry professionals on the board who might be looking for free student labor or additional contracts from the institution or members who sit on multiple Boards.
Transparency and accountability in decision-making . Minutes from the meetings should be publicly posted so that administrators, faculty, students can see what decisions were made and why.
Performance metrics . The Board of Governors should hold themselves to a high standard of performance and create benchmarks that demonstrate progress, so that institutional improvements are known and measured. The governors should evaluate their own performance.
Review of the Head of Institution . Just as it is important to undertake self-review, it is also important to provide honest feedback to the leader of the institution, so that he or she is held accountable for the day-to-day running of the school.

This article is published in collaboration with The World Bank’s Education for Global Development Blog . Publication does not imply endorsement of views by the World Economic Forum.

To keep up with the Agenda subscribe to our weekly newsletter .

Author: Jessica Lee is an Operations Officer in the World Bank Group’s Education Global Practice, where she provides support to education projects and related activities. Toby Linden is a Lead Education Specialist in the World Bank Group’s Education Global Practice, where he leads the Bank’s education team in India.

Image: A Master of Business Administration (MBA) student works on a computer in a library at Management Development Institute (MDI) in Gurgaon, on the outskirts of New Delhi. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi.

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

.chakra .wef-1dtnjt5{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;} More on Education .chakra .wef-17xejub{-webkit-flex:1;-ms-flex:1;flex:1;justify-self:stretch;-webkit-align-self:stretch;-ms-flex-item-align:stretch;align-self:stretch;} .chakra .wef-nr1rr4{display:-webkit-inline-box;display:-webkit-inline-flex;display:-ms-inline-flexbox;display:inline-flex;white-space:normal;vertical-align:middle;text-transform:uppercase;font-size:0.75rem;border-radius:0.25rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;line-height:1.2;-webkit-letter-spacing:1.25px;-moz-letter-spacing:1.25px;-ms-letter-spacing:1.25px;letter-spacing:1.25px;background:none;padding:0px;color:#B3B3B3;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone;}@media screen and (min-width:37.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:0.875rem;}}@media screen and (min-width:56.5rem){.chakra .wef-nr1rr4{font-size:1rem;}} See all

Why we need global minimum quality standards in EdTech

Natalia Kucirkova

April 17, 2024

How boosting women’s financial literacy could help you live a long, fulfilling life

Morgan Camp

April 9, 2024

How universities can use blockchain to transform research

Scott Doughman

March 12, 2024

Empowering women in STEM: How we break barriers from classroom to C-suite

Genesis Elhussein and Julia Hakspiel

March 1, 2024

Why we need education built for peace – especially in times of war

February 28, 2024

These 5 key trends will shape the EdTech market upto 2030

Malvika Bhagwat

February 26, 2024

Governance and Good Governance: A New Framework for Political Analysis

Original Paper
Open access
Published: 12 October 2017
Volume 11 , pages 1–8, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Yu Keping 1

140k Accesses

99 Citations

9 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

In a time of great change, accelerating globalization and increasing uncertainty, all countries, whether developed or developing, are searching for a new form of governance that is better adapted to the times so as to gain an advantage in economic competitiveness and create substantial and sustainable social growth. As governance theory is becoming the dominant political theory in response to the change, the values backing the discourse and texts consistent with them have helped revise the theory of government in mainstream politics and were agreed upon by global politicians, scholars, officials and entrepreneurs. When we comprehend governance theory based on the practice of public administration in China, it strikes us how theoretically and practically important governance theory is for rebuilding the intellectual system of China’s democratic politics, searching for an institutional platform for good governance, transforming the public policy-making model and getting rid of the practice in public administration in the process of market-oriented development that is inefficient, or even fails in many ways.

Multiple Dimensions of Governance

Democratic Governance: A Genealogy

The Applicability of Governance Theory in China: A Novel Approach

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

The English word governance derives from Latin and ancient Greek and originally meant control, guidance and manipulation. Its meaning had long overlapped with the word government and was mainly used to refer to administrative and political activities related to national public affairs. However, in the 1990s, it was given a new meaning by western political scientists and economists. Since then, the word has implied much more than it did traditionally and is starkly different from what the word government means. Instead of an exclusively English word, it is in common use among people speaking other major European languages; instead of an exclusively political term, it is widely used in social and economic spheres.

When trying to sum up what was happening in Africa in 1989, the World Bank used the term “crisis in governance” for the first time. Since then, governance as a word has been widely used in political development studies, especially for describing the political status of post-colonial and developing countries. By now, scholars from various countries have come up with five major propositions on governance as theory. They are as follows:

Governance refers to a set of institutions and actors that are drawn from but also beyond the Government. It challenges the authority of the State or the Government in the traditional sense and maintains that the Government is not the only power center of a state. As long as the power exercised by a public or private institution is recognized by the public, it is possible to become a power center at a specific level.

Governance identifies the blurring of boundaries and responsibilities for tackling social and economic issues. It indicates that, in modern society, the State is transferring its once exclusive responsibilities to civil society (i.e., private sector organizations and voluntary groups, which are undertaking more and more responsibilities that were formerly in the hands of the State). As a result, the boundaries between the State and society and between public and private sectors are becoming increasingly blurred, as are definitions of their responsibilities.

Governance identifies the power dependence involved in relationships between institutions involved in collective action. To be specific, every organization devoted to collective action has to depend on other organizations; to achieve its purpose, it has to exchange resources and negotiate a common goal with others, and the outcome of the exchange depends not only on the resources of each actor, but also on the rules of the game and the environment in which the exchange takes place.

Governance emphasizes the importance of autonomous self-governing networks of actors. A self-governing network as such has the authority to issue orders in a certain sphere and work with the Government in this sphere and share its responsibilities for public administration.

Governance recognizes the capacity to get things done without relying on the power of the Government to command or use its authority. In public affairs management, there are other management tools and techniques and the Government has the responsibility to use them to steer and guide public affairs (Stoker 1999 ).

Of all the definitions of governance, the one made by the Commission on Global Governance is one of the most representative and definitive. In a research report titled Our Global Neighborhood issued in 1995, the commission defined governance thus: “governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action may be taken. It includes formal institutions and regimes empowered to enforce compliance, as well as informal arrangements that people and institutions either have agreed to or perceive to be in their interest.” It has four features: governance is not a set of rules or an activity, but a process; the process of governance is not based on control, but on coordination; it involves both public and private sectors; it is not a formal institution, but continuing interaction. Footnote 1

From the aforementioned definitions of governance, we can see that, essentially, governance means exercising authority to maintain order and meet the needs of the public within a certain range. The purpose of governance is to guide, steer and regulate citizens’ activities through the power of different systems and relations so as to maximize the public interest. In terms of political science, governance refers to the process of political administration, including the normative foundation of political authority, approaches to dealing with political affairs and the management of public resources. It particularly focuses on the role of political authority in maintaining social order and the exercise of administrative power in a defined sphere.

Literally, there seems no great difference between “governance” and “government.” Yet semantically, they are vastly different. To many scholars, a prerequisite for correct understanding of governance is to distinguish it from government. As Jean-Pierre Gaudin said, “Governance has to be distinguished from the traditional concept of government by the State from the very beginning” (Gaudin 1999 ). As a political administration process like government by the State, governance also requires authority and power and ultimately aims to maintain a normal social order. Despite their similarities, there are two fundamental differences between them.

First of all, the most fundamental, or even essential, difference between them is that governance requires authority but, unlike government, this authority does not necessarily come from organs of the Government. However, the authority for government is necessarily the State. The body of government is necessarily the public institutions in a society, while the body of governance can either be a public institution, a private one, or even a cooperation between the two. Governance is the cooperation between a political state and its civil society, the Government and non-governmental organizations, public and private institutions, which can be mandatory or voluntary cooperation. It is mainly characterized by “contracting, rather than supervision; decentralization, rather than centralization; administration by the State, rather than redistribution by the State; management based on market principles, rather than management by administrative departments; cooperation between the State and private sectors, rather than being guided by the State” (Merrien 1999 ). Therefore, governance is a broader concept than government. From modern corporations to colleges and basic-level communities, all of them can do without government by the State, but not without governance, if they are meant to run efficiently and in an orderly manner.

Second, power runs in different directions in management processes. For government by the State, power runs top-down all the time as it exercises the political authority of the Government to implement one-way management on social and public affairs by issuing orders and making and executing policies. By comparison, as an administrative process of interaction between the upper and lower levels, the body of governance manages public affairs through cooperation, negotiation, partnership, establishment of identity and common goals, etc. In essence, governance is cooperation based on market principles, common interest and identity. Its administrative mechanism does not rely on the authority of the Government substantially, but rather, the authority of a collaborative network. Its power is multi-directional and two-way, rather than unidirectional and top-down.

The immediate reason why Western political scientists and management scientists came up with the concept of governance and advocated replacing government is that they saw market failure, as well as state failure, in social resource allocation. Market failure means that it is impossible to bring about Pareto Optimum, a term in economics, by market-based means alone. As the market has innate limitations in restricting monopoly, supplying public goods, restraining extremely selfish behavior by individuals, bringing the anarchic state of production under control, cost accounting, etc., market-based means alone cannot bring about the optimum state of social resource allocation. Likewise, instruments of the State alone, including making plans and issuing orders, cannot do that either, or promote or safeguard the citizens’ political and economic interests ultimately. In view of state and market failure, there has been a “growing fascination with using governance mechanisms as a solution to market failure and/or that in State coordination” (Jessop 1999 ).

Governance can compensate for certain deficiencies of the State and the market in regulation and coordination, but it is never a panacea. State and market can fail in social resource allocation; so can governance. So, a natural challenge facing scholars is how to overcome its failure and make it more effective. In response to the challenge, many scholars and international organizations have come up with a number of concepts, such as meta-governance, sound governance, effective governance and good governance. Among them, the most influential one is “good governance.”

Ever since the State and government came into being, there had been the concept of good government in the English language. However, since the 1990s, good government, which had dominated as a political ideal, has been severely challenged around the world. The challenge to it comes from “good governance.” Since the 1990s, there has been an increasing usage of the concept in English and Chinese political science literature, making it one of the most pervasive terms. What does good governance mean? What are the essential difference between good government and good governance? And what are the elements of good governance? Political scientists are still debating these questions.

In a nutshell, good governance refers to the public administration process that maximizes public interest. One of its essential features is that it is a kind of collaborative management of public life performed by both the State and the citizens and a new relationship between political State and civil society, as well as the optimum state of the two. To sum up all the perspectives on good governance, we can see that it has six essentials:

Legitimacy It refers to the state or quality that social order and authority are voluntarily recognized and obeyed. It has no direct relevance to laws and regulations, and from the legal angle something legal is not necessarily legitimate. Only the authority and orders genuinely recognized by people within a specific group are legitimate in political science. The higher the degree of legitimacy is, the higher the level of good governance will be. The principal approach to achieving and improving legitimacy is to maximize the consensus and political identity shared by citizens. Therefore, good governance requires the relevant administrative bodies and administrators to manage various conflicts of interest among citizens and between them and the State to the maximum so as to obtain the citizens’ maximum consent to and approval of their public administration activities.

Transparency It refers to the publicity of political information. All citizens are entitled to the information on State policies that are related to their own interests, including legislative activities, policy-making, legal provisions, policy enforcement, administrative budget, public expenditure and other relevant political information. Transparency requires that the aforementioned political information be duly communicated to citizens through various media vehicles so that they can participate in public policy-making and supervise the process of public administration in an effective manner. The higher the degree of transparency is, the higher the level of good governance will be.

Accountability Accountability means holding every person accountable for his or her own behavior. In public administration, it refers in particular to the duties related to a certain position or institution and its corresponding obligations. Accountability means that administrators and administrative bodies must fulfill the functions and obligations of the positions they hold. If they fail to fulfill their bounden functions or duties, or if they do so in an inappropriate manner, their conduct constitutes dereliction of duty or lack of accountability. The more accountability the public, especially public officers and administrative bodies have, the higher the level of good governance will be. In this regard, good governance requires the employment of both law and ethics to enhance the accountability of individuals and institutions.

Rule of law Essentially, rule of law means that law is the supreme principle in public political administration that should be observed by all government officials and citizens, who should be all equal before the law. The immediate goal of rule of law is to regulate citizens’ behavior, manage social affairs and maintain a normal order in social life, while its ultimate goal is to protect citizens’ basic political rights, including freedom and equality. In this sense, rule of law is opposite to rule of man as it both regulates citizens’ behavior and restricts the conduct of the State. It is the arch-enemy of political autocracy. Rule of law is a basic requirement of good governance, which would be impossible without a sound legal system, due respect for the law or a social order based on the law.

Responsiveness Responsiveness is closely associated with the aforementioned concept of accountability. In a sense, it is an extension of accountability. Essentially, it means that public administrators and administrative bodies must respond to the demands of citizens in a timely and responsible manner, and that it is forbidden to make delays without cause or leave any issue unresolved without response. When necessary, they should proactively solicit advice from citizens, explain their policies to them and answer their questions on a regular basis. The greater the level of responsiveness is, the higher the level of good governance will be.

Effectiveness It mainly refers to management efficiency. It has two essential meanings: rational administrative structure, scientifically designed administrative procedures and flexible administrative activities; and minimized administrative costs. Ineffective or inefficient administrative activities are out of tune with good governance. The higher the level of good governance is, the higher the effectiveness of administration will be.

Good governance is the active and productive cooperation between the State and citizens, and the key to its success lies in the powers participating in political administration. Only when citizens have sufficient political power to participate in elections, policy-making, administration and supervision can they prompt the State and join hands with it to build public authority and order. Apparently, democracy is the only practical mechanism that can safeguard the fully free and equal political power owned by citizens. Hence, good governance is organically combined with democracy. In an autocratic system, it is possible to have good government when the system is at its best, but it is impossible to have good governance. Good governance can only be achieved in a free and democratic political system, as it cannot emerge without freedom and democracy.

In fact, there were more profound causes why the theory and practice of good governance sprang up in the 1990s. First of all, good governance is more widely applicable than good government in the traditional sense. Good government has the same scope of coverage as the State. In modern society, the State cannot interfere in many areas, from civil organizations like companies, communities, clubs and professional associations to the international community. In contrast, good governance is not subject to the scope of coverage of the State as it is also indispensable to companies, communities, regions, states and the international community. Second, globalization is becoming the dominant feature of our time, which, in fact, has been referred to by many as the “Global Age.” One important feature of globalization is the growing influence of transnational organizations and supranational organizations and the diminishing sovereignty of nation-states and diminishing power of their governments. As the government authority of nation-states in the traditional sense is eroded, good governance is playing an increasingly important role. It is because the international community and the society within a state are still in want of public authority and order, a new kind of public authority and order that can only be achieved through good governance, rather than created by the State in the traditional sense. Finally, good governance is an inevitable consequence of democratization. Democratization is a political feature of our time, as well as an irresistible historical trend. One of its essential significances is that political power is returning from political states to civil societies. Limited government power and the shrinking functions and powers of the State do not necessarily mean vanishing social and public authority, but rather that public authority will be based more on cooperation between the State and citizens.

Immature and essentially ambiguous as it is, governance theory is a breakaway from the traditional dichotomous thinking that has long been dominant in social sciences, i.e., market versus planning, public sector versus private sector, political State versus civil society and nation-state versus international community. It regards effective administration as cooperation between the two; it tries to develop completely new techniques for public affairs management; it emphasizes that administration is cooperation; it argues that legitimate power comes not only from the State, but also from the civil society. The theory also deems governance to be a new practical form of modern democracy. Those are all its contributions of positive significance to political studies. However, there is also a dangerous tendency in Western countries to use the theory to justify some transnationals’ and superpowers’ interference with the internal affairs of other countries and pursuit of international hegemony. Based on the premise that the role of the State and state sovereignty are insignificant and the boundaries of nation-states are blurred, governance theory, especially global governance theory, emphasizes the nature of governance as a transnational and global activity. The danger here is that undermining the important roles of state sovereignty and sovereign government in domestic and international governance might be regarded as a theoretical basis for the superpowers and multinationals to interfere with the internal affairs of other countries and promote their international hegemonic policies. Therefore, we must keep a wary eye on the dangerous tendency of governance theory, especially global governance theory.

See Our Global Neighborhood compiled by Commission on Global Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995 , pp. 2–3.

Commission on Global Governance (ed.). 1995. Our global neighborhood , 2–3. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar

Gaudin, Jean-Pierre. 1999. Modern governance, yesterday and today: Some clarifications to be gained from French government policies. International Social Science Journal 50: 47–56. (Chinese edition) .

Article Google Scholar

Jessop, Bob. 1999. The rise of governance and the risks of failure: The case of economic development. International Social Science Journal 50: 29–45. (Chinese edition) .

Merrien, Francois-Xavier. 1999. Governance and modern welfare states. International Social Science Journal 50: 57–67. (Chinese edition) .

Stoker, Gerry. 1999. Governance as theory: Five propositions. International Social Science Journal 50: 17–28. (Chinese edition) .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Government, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu Keping .

Additional information

This article is translated from a Chinese version, which was previously published in Nanjing Social Sciences, 9 (2001).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Keping, Y. Governance and Good Governance: A New Framework for Political Analysis. Fudan J. Hum. Soc. Sci. 11 , 1–8 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-017-0197-4

Download citation

Received : 11 June 2017

Accepted : 14 September 2017

Published : 12 October 2017

Issue Date : March 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s40647-017-0197-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Good governance
Governance reform
Public administration
Political science
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Advisory Board
Guest Authors
NEW: Podcast
Artificial Intelligence
Climate Change
Congressional Oversight
Counterterrorism
Cybersecurity
Disinformation
Human Rights
Immigration
Intelligence activities
International Criminal Law
Israel-Hamas War
January 6th Attack on US Capitol
Law of Armed Conflict
Local Voices
Racial Justice
Social Media Platforms
United Nations
Use of Force
Russia-Ukraine War
Trump Trials Clearinghouse

Good Governance Paper No. 8: How to Strengthen Oversight by Congress

by Jim Townsend and Elise Bean

October 23, 2020

Filed under:

Congressional Oversight , Good Governance Papers

[Editors’ note: This essay is one in a series—the Good Governance Papers —organized by Just Security . In these essays, leading experts explore actionable legislative and administrative proposals to promote non-partisan principles of good government, public integrity, and the rule of law. For more information, you can read the Introduction by the series’ editors.]

Good Government Requires Good Oversight

Legislative oversight is fundamental to a sustainable democracy. Good government requires good oversight to ensure effective programs, intelligent spending of taxpayer dollars, and a government that can respond to the country’s evolving conditions, needs, and values.

When done well, fact-based, bipartisan congressional oversight can identify problems, build a shared understanding of complex issues, bridge political divides, and provide a factual foundation for reforms. It can advance the American system of checks and balances envisioned in the Constitution. It can play a vital role in curbing abuses that limit or undermine individual liberty and opportunity. Because oversight hearings also provide a key lens through which the public views Congress, by modeling responsible, competent governance, congressional oversight hearings can help increase public confidence in the institution.

But today multiple problems impede effective congressional oversight. They include the absence of Congress-wide oversight standards and norms, which leads to confusion, fragmentation, and disagreements among committees and Members. Partisan investigative topics often sour committee relationships, and Executive Branch defiance of congressional information requests breeds conflict. Also problematic are inexperienced and untrained investigative staff, and five-minute time limits on questions during hearings that not only make it hard for Members to obtain meaningful information but also may lead to disenchantment with oversight efforts.

When poorly done, oversight investigations can become a partisan brawl that deepens divisions, confuses the facts, and stymies reforms. Too often, highly partisan, fact-free oversight has damaged public faith in our democratic institutions while deepening public cynicism about elected officials. To strengthen government performance as well as increase its public standing, Congress needs to improve its oversight function.

Improving Oversight

We offer here six proposals – some easier, some harder to achieve – that hold promise for improving the state of oversight in Congress. Some require new House or Senate rules, others necessitate changes in practice, but none require a new statute.

Congressional legal opinions on oversight matters. One key reform involves Congress developing a process for issuing bipartisan legal opinions on oversight issues. For decades, the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) has been issuing official legal opinions that provide guidance to Executive Branch agencies on how to respond to information requests from Congress and offer principles to courts on how to adjudicate interbranch conflicts. It is no surprise that those OLC opinions invariably favor the Executive Branch over the Legislative Branch, one stark example being OLC opinions that claim senior presidential advisors are immune to congressional subpoenas, the exact opposite of the conclusion reached by courts that have ruled on the issue. Criticisms related to excessive secrecy , bias , and overreach in OLC opinions on congressional oversight issues have also been growing.

DOJ has nevertheless continued to use its OLC opinions not only to unify how federal agencies respond to Congress, but also to try to persuade courts to favor the Executive Branch over the Legislative Branch when disputes arise. For too long, Congress has allowed those OLC opinions to remain unanswered. Neither the House nor Senate has an equivalent process or set of official legal opinions to provide guidance to congressional committees, federal agencies, or the courts on matters related to oversight. If Congress were to establish such a process and use it to issue thoughtful, well-supported, and bipartisan legal opinions on oversight matters, Congress could help establish its own oversight norms, educate Members and staff, increase uniformity among congressional committees, inform the Executive Branch of its oversight expectations, and advance oversight effectiveness. The opinions would also strengthen the hand of Congress in court.

The House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress recently issued a set of bipartisan recommendations that, among other matters, advocate (in Recommendations 81-82) increasing “legal resources” to “help strengthen the role of the legislative branch” and facilitate a “true system of checks and balances by ensuring the legislative branch is sufficiently represented in the courts.” Those recommendations provide a foundation for Congress finally establishing a process to issue bipartisan, bicameral legal opinions on oversight matters suitable for citation in court. A good first step would be for the 117 th Congress to establish a bipartisan, bicameral task force to design and propose what that process should look like.

More time to question witnesses. A second, much easier reform proposal focuses on how Members of Congress question witnesses during investigative hearings. Right now, the five-minute limit routinely placed on Member questions during oversight hearings too often diminishes the gravity and coherence of the sessions, leaves Members of Congress struggling to get answers to their questions, and gives the impression that legislators are rude or insensitive to witnesses. Short-duration questioning also produces abrupt topic changes that can make an oversight hearing seem confusing or even chaotic. The resulting exchanges are not conducive to producing a useful hearing record or promoting public respect for the institution.

House and Senate rules could be amended to encourage committees, at the beginning of an investigative hearing and the start of each witness panel, to approve question periods that extend beyond the five-minute segments typical of most House hearings. For example, House rule XI, clause 2(j)(2)(A), could be amended to allow committees holding an oversight hearing to permit the chair and ranking member, at the beginning of each witness panel, to each question the panel for an equal time period of not less than 15 minutes. After the initial round of questioning, the rule could require the committee to apply the five-minute rule until every committee member seeking to question the witness has an opportunity to do so. The rule could also be amended to explicitly permit any committee member to delegate their five minutes to another committee member.

The 116 th Congress has already shown, on an ad hoc basis, how longer questioning periods can contribute to more coherent and decorous hearing exchanges. During the recent Senate hearings to consider a Supreme Court nomination, for example, each Senator was given a 30-minute period to question the nominee. The resulting respectful exchanges would have been difficult under a five-minute rule. On the House side, during the Intelligence Committee impeachment hearings, the majority and minority were each given a 45-minute block of time at the beginning of each session to question the witnesses. The longer periods enabled committee leadership to ask a series of questions to clarify the testimony provided and follow through on the points they wanted to make. The longer periods also made it easier to establish facts, explore important details, and prevent witnesses from engaging in evasive tactics. While the impeachment proceedings were marred by other problems, the longer questioning periods appear to have elicited better information and fewer uncomfortable moments than would have been possible using five-minute segments.

This relatively easy procedural change has the potential to deliver better outcomes for both committee members and observers of congressional oversight hearings.

Joint compensation of committee clerks. A third reform is more mundane, though no less valuable. Each House and Senate committee employs administrative staff, such as clerks, who provide support for congressional investigations. They are the unsung staff who send out the subpoenas, log in the documents, type up reports, compile hearing records, and archive investigative materials.

Currently, on some House committees and subcommittees, the majority and minority staffs each hire their own administrative personnel, meaning there are often two clerks, each hired on a partisan basis, to handle similar administrative duties. These House administrative personnel know they answer to only one party. In contrast, in the Senate, the committee and subcommittee majority and minority staffs jointly hire their administrative personnel and typically split their compensation on a 50-50 basis. Senate administrative personnel know they are paid by both parties and thus answer to both sides. The Senate approach has strengthened its committees by saving them money (through hiring fewer clerks) and encouraging a more bipartisan, even-handed administration of oversight activities.

To discourage partisanship within its committees, the House should consider adopting the Senate practice. The House Modernization Committee has already paved the way for this reform by advocating (in Recommendation 74) that committees “hire bipartisan staff approved by both the Chair and Ranking Member to promote strong institutional knowledge … and a less partisan oversight agenda.” The resulting salary savings would be an added benefit.

Investigative techniques that build bipartisanship. A softer set of reforms focuses on investigative techniques that foster bipartisanship in congressional oversight inquiries. They begin with a committee chair and ranking member making a public commitment to a bipartisan investigation and instructing their staffs to work together in good faith to reach consensus on the facts. Investigative techniques that encourage bipartisan factfinding should follow. Examples include both sides of the aisle issuing only joint document requests; jointly attending key briefings and interviews to ensure everyone hears the same information at the same time; producing joint post-interview summaries to ensure a common understanding of what was said; and drafting joint investigative reports to cement consensus on the facts or at least narrow differences. Still another tactic is to issue only joint press releases, with at least one quote from each side of the aisle, again to uncover and resolve differences.

These techniques are not pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking. For years, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) has used them to conduct some of the best investigations in Congress. PSI leaders like Senators Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Bill Roth (R-DE), Sam Nunn (D-GA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Rob Portman (R-OH), and Tom Carper (D-DE) routinely committed their staffs to joint investigations, because PSI’s track record and traditions had proven that bipartisan investigations were superior. The inquiries had shown that staffers who held fundamentally different views but investigated together asked more questions, examined more issues, and engaged in more challenging conversations with each other about what really happened and why. Using that bipartisan process to reach consensus on the facts is neither quick nor easy, but when motivated by leaders who insist on their staffs working together, it can produce fact-finding that is more accurate, thorough, thoughtful, and credible.

Enshrining bipartisan investigative techniques in House and Senate rules may not be practical, though the House Modernization Committee (in Recommendations 75-76) has called for “bipartisan pre-hearing committee meetings” and the piloting of “rules changes that could have a positive effect committee-wide.” Perhaps one initial step in this area would be to ban partisan committee websites and to require joint press releases prior to an oversight hearing. In the meantime, committee leaders don’t have to wait for a rule change to adopt investigative techniques that produce the gold standard of congressional oversight – fact-based, bipartisan inquiries.

More training for Members of Congress and staff. The bipartisan investigative techniques advocated here often do not come naturally to congressional staff or Members of Congress; they benefit from training and support.

An expanded Congressional Staff Academy, supported by the House Modernization Committee, as well as the Senate Office of Education and Training could provide the needed staff training opportunities. The Levin Center, together with the Lugar Center and the Project on Government Oversight, already holds regular bipartisan training sessions called “ boot camps ” to hone the skills needed to conduct fact-based, high-quality inquiries. Those two-day boot camps combine staff from the House and Senate, and from both parties, in investigative exercises that have trained more than 250 staffers to date. In recent years, would-be participants have submitted over 100 applications for the 25 spots available in each boot camp, demonstrating the strong demand for oversight training. The House Modernization Committee has already called for (in Recommendations 32, 33, & 63) an increase in “bipartisan learning opportunities for staff,” “bipartisan committee staff briefings,” and staff certifications in congressional skills. The 117 th Congress should consider taking concrete steps to create those bipartisan training and certification opportunities.

Similar considerations apply to Members of Congress assigned to oversight committees. While some may have conducted oversight on the state or local level, or can draw on prosecutorial or other legal expertise, for many Members oversight investigations require a new skill set. Even a short oversight seminar at a new Members orientation session or Congressional Research Service retreat could help – especially if that seminar were bipartisan.

Committee budgets that better reflect House composition. This final reform suggestion – which enjoys bipartisan support – is a big one. It stems from the reality that the country is politically divided, and voters are producing narrow majorities in both the House and Senate in the range of 55, 52, or 51 percent. At the same time, the House has chosen to continue to allocate two-thirds of committee funding to the majority party and only one-third to the minority. Today, that means a House majority of 53% gets 67% of the available committee funding. While that funding split may look good to the majority party today, that perception will change if a small political shift leads to a different House majority tomorrow. Under the current approach, a change in party control threatens dramatic funding changes and abrupt staffing shifts, including the loss of staff with oversight expertise.

The Senate, in contrast, long ago replaced the one third-two thirds funding split between the parties with a committee allocation process that more closely reflects the actual composition of the majority and minority parties in the Senate. The resulting division of committee funds is not only fairer, it is generally less disruptive to committees when majorities shift, including committees exercising oversight authority. To reap the same benefits, the House should consider a similar committee funding allocation process.

This list of ways to strengthen Congress’ capacity to conduct effective oversight is far from exhaustive. For example, another vital reform already addressed in this series involves strengthening Congress’ ability to enforce its subpoenas. But all investigative improvements first require that Congress acknowledge the urgency and promise of better oversight. As Senator Levin once put it: “You can’t get good government without good oversight.”

About the Author(s)

Jim townsend.

Director of the Levin Center at Wayne Law; former congressional staffer and Michigan state legislator. Follow him on Twitter ( @JimTownsend ).

Washington Co-Director at Levin Center at Wayne Law, former Staff Director and Chief Counsel of the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Follow her on Twitter ( @elisejosanbean ).

Send A Letter To The Editor

Read these related stories next:

House meeting on white house ai overreach highlights congressional inaction.

by Melanie Geller and Julian Melendi

Apr 12th, 2024

The Collapse of US Haiti Policy

by Hon. Andy Levin

Apr 5th, 2024

How Trump Valet’s Testimony Supports DOJ’s January 6th Case

by Tom Joscelyn

Mar 22nd, 2024

American Autocracy Threat Tracker

by Norman L. Eisen , Siven Watt , Andrew Warren , Jacob Kovacs-Goodman and Francois Barrilleaux

Feb 26th, 2024

Congress Must Strengthen Oversight on Intelligence Sharing and Civilian Harm

by Steven Katz and John Ramming Chappell

Jan 25th, 2024

The Just Security Podcast: A Human Rights Law Returns to Spark Debate on U.S. Arms Sales

by John Ramming Chappell and Paras Shah

Jan 19th, 2024

The Biden Impeachment Inquiry: A Heedless Descent into Constitutional Anarchy

by Frank O. Bowman, III

Dec 13th, 2023

Law and Policy Guide to US Arms Transfers to Israel

by John Ramming Chappell , Annie Shiel , Seth Binder , Elias Yousif , Bill Monahan and Amanda Klasing

Nov 8th, 2023

Key Takeaways from September 28 House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing on AUMF Reform

by Brian Finucane

Oct 4th, 2023

U.S. Senate AI Hearings Highlight Increased Need for Regulation

by Faiza Patel and Melanie Geller

Sep 25th, 2023

Questions for Congress to Ask the Biden Administration at the AUMF Hearing

Congress should pass the safeguard act to overhaul arms sales law and protect human rights.

by John Ramming Chappell

Sep 20th, 2023

Public management reforms have been a key factor in improving capacities of OECD countries to address issues such as budget deficits; external pressures on competitiveness, not least as a result of growing globalisation; perceived lack of public confidence in government; growing needs for services; and increasing demands for better and more responsive services.
There is also a growing recognition that the current world financial crisis stems from weaknesses in the institutions of governance, and that durable solutions to this crisis need to address these governance problems.
Governments create the conditions for functioning of markets, operation of private firms, strength of civil society, and welfare of communities and individuals.
The quality of governance is recognised as fundamental to ensuring the quality of life of citizens.
In its own right, good governance is important as a determinant of the sustainability and strength of democracies.

Aspects of Good Governance

G ood government depends on an ability to exercise power, and to make good decisions over time, across a spectrum of economic, social, environmental and other areas. This is linked with the government’s capacity for knowledge, mediation, resource allocation, implementation and maintenance of key relationships.

Technical and managerial competence
Organisational capacity
Reliability, predictability and the rule of law

Accountability

Transparency and open information systems

Participation

Technical and managerial competence.

T echnical and managerial competence of civil servants is an obvious factor of good governance. This may be less of a constraint than it used to be, as access to education has improved, but rapid changes require ongoing development of skills.

Organisational Capacity

G ood governance has to be built on the quality of organisations so that development is based on this rather than simply relying only on political will, personal will of a strong leader and state power, which may not be sustainable over the longer term.

Having skilled staff is not sufficient if the government organisations do not have the capacity to make good use of these skills. Capacity of government organisations is a key factor in the provision of many important services to businesses and the public, and in creating conditions for economic progress and social cohesion.

The organisational structure and management systems of government have been reformed in many OECD countries. The problem was often seen as excessive centralisation, inflexibility and lack of efficiency. The key response to this has been to provide managers and staff with more autonomy in operational issues in return for more accountability for performance. In other countries the problem may be a lack of regularity and discipline in the administration, often with associated corruption. In such situations the response typically will need to focus on strengthening the basic management systems of government, involving to a certain extent increased bureaucratisation.

Reliability, Predictability and the Rule of Law

T he rule of law refers to the institutional process of setting, interpreting and implementing laws and other regulations. It means that decisions taken by government must be founded in law and that private firms and individuals are protected from arbitrary decisions. Reliability requires governance that is free from distortionary incentives - through corruption, nepotism, patronage or capture by narrow private interest groups; guarantees property and personal rights; and achieves some sort of social stability. This provides a degree of reliability and predictability that is essential for firms and individuals to take good decisions.

Reliability and predictability do not mean that the more specific the regulations are the better. Excessive specification can lead to rigidities and risk of selective application of regulations. Interpretation and effective implementation of individual regulations requires a degree of discretion. This discretion can be counterbalanced by administrative procedure legislation and external reviews of decisions (appeal mechanisms, judicial review, ombudsmen etc.).

Reliability and predictability require certain degree of political stability. Governments need to be able to make credible commitments and persuade the private sector that decisions will not ultimately be reversed due to political uncertainty. While this is not necessarily related to a particular political system in the short term, over the longer term democracy enhances stability by giving a voice to citizens to express their preferences through an open competition.

A ccountability can be both an end in itself -- representing democratic values -- and a means towards the development of more efficient and effective organisations. Politicians and public servants are given enormous power through the laws and regulations they implement, resources they control and the organisations they manage. Accountability is a key way to ensure that this power is used appropriately and in accordance with the public interest. Accountability requires clarity about who is accountable to whom for what and that civil servants, organisations and politicians are held accountable for their decisions and performance.

Accountability can be strengthened through formal reporting requirements and external scrutiny (such as an independent Audit Office, Ombudsmen, etc.). Democratic accountability, as represented by accountability of ministers to parliament and the parliament to voters, can be seen as objective in itself, but it also strengthens accountability in general. Many OECD countries are strengthening accountability through more focus on accountability for performance as opposed to limiting accountability to regularity of decisions.

Transparency and Open Information Systems

T ransparency is an important aspect of good governance, and transparent decision making is critical for the private sector to make sound decisions and investments. Accountability and the rule of law require openness and good information so higher levels of administration, external reviewers and the general public can verify performance and compliance to law.

Governments have access to a vast amount of important information. Dissemination of this information through transparency and open information systems can provide specific information that firms and individuals need to have to be able to make good decisions. Capital markets depend for example on information openness.

P articipation can involve consultation in the development of policies and decision-making, elections and other democratic processes. Participation gives governments access to important information about the needs and priorities of individuals, communities and private businesses. Governments that involve the public, will be in a better position to make good decisions, and decisions will enjoy more support once taken. While there may not be direct links between democracy and every aspect of good governance, clearly accountability, transparency and participation are reinforced by democracy, and themselves are factors in support of democratic quality.

Relations Between Different Aspects of Good Governance

T here are complex relations between the different aspects of good governance. In many ways some factors can be seen as preconditions of others (e.g. technical and managerial competence is one precondition of organisational capacity, and organisational capacity is one precondition of maintaining the rule of law). But there are also important effects in the other direction (e.g. organisational capacity reinforces technical and managerial competence, accountability reinforces the rule of law).

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

We're Hiring!
Help Center

GOOD GOVERNANCE AND ITS IMPACT ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

Good governance is a polymorphous concept that stems from economic and political science. It is used both in the context of the management of public action and in a strategic perspective of economic development. In this article, we are first interested in deconstructing the various contributions to define and reaffirm the role of "good governance" in development strategies. What is "good governance"? How does it have an impact on a country's economy? This paper addresses the issue of causality between good governance and economic development, by examining the inter-connections between economic development and governance indicators to increase transparency and efficiency. The purpose of this article is to organize a systematic literature review in a scientific manner from data collection, through data selection, reading and finally data analysis. The impact of good Governance in economic development differs in political system structure, governance current characteristics and contextual factors. Although outcome factors are influenced by contextual determinants, the governance characteristics are of great importance.

Related Papers

Smita Lahkar

Governance is defined as the exercise of economic, political and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises mechanisms, processes and institutions, through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights meet their obligations and mediate their differences. Thus, governance can be summed up as a process through which authority in a country is exercised (UNDP, 1997; UNESCO, 2012). Development linked governance has been an issue much debated about in the contemporary world. Since the second half of the 1980’s, growth and development studies have started to shed light on the importance of improving institutions of governance on economic growth. Good institutions, good governance and good leadership are considered by many authors as necessary conditions to support the development effort of a country or region. Good governance is believed to be the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting d...

Rachel Gisselquist

Kabiru Aderemi Adeyemo

Good governance is a precondition for economic development. The quality of governance plays a vital role in the economic development of countries. The need for good governance is widely recognized in today's discourses on development. The exhortation for good governance to achieve economic development is widespread. President Obama who underscored the importance of good governance to achieve economic development in African countries would no doubt prescribe the same for other countries as well. Even among those who agree that there is a relationship between good governance and economic development, the nexus is not at all clear.

Mike Omilusi

This study explores the conceptual interface between democracy, development and good governance. It also examines the symbiosis between the three concepts, from theoretical perspective and the praxis. The paper historicizes and traces the emergence of good governance as a concept and universally acceptable principle and its use in international development literature to situate how public institutions ought to or should conduct public affairs and manage public resources, particularly within the frameworks of corporate, international, national and local administration or organizations, and the civil society. The study examines the relationship between democracy, good governance and development in Nigeria and blames the slow pace or the state of development in the country, not on lack of resources, but on the absence of good governance, transparency and accountability. It also identifies pervasive corruption and weakness of institutions of the Nigerian state which individuals manipula...

Research and Analysis Journal

Imrana A Buba

This paper revisits the main arguments on the role of ̳good governance‘ in facilitating economic development. It observes that there are some examples in which neoliberal ̳good governance‘ played a role in facilitating economic development but there are many other examples in which countries attained some level of economic development with governance institutions that were bereft of much 'good governance‘ elements. Thus, it concludes that 'good governance‘ is not an essential pre-requisite for development but it might play some role in facilitating development. The paper argues against the dominant 'one-size-fits-all‘ approach to good governance and support 'good enough governance‘, that encourage reforms to be questioned, prioritised, and made relevant to the conditions of individual countries.

Public Administration and Public Policy

Macrina Lelei

Yönetim ve ekonomi araştırmaları dergisi

NURTEN DERİCİ

SSRN Electronic Journal

Haider Khan

Kashif Hussain

Economic governance has been the foundation of the economic development and growth. Impact of good governance and role of institutions in the process of economic growth and development required for governance have been crucial to investigate due to lack of theories to incorporate the role of good governance in the process of economic growth and institutional reforms. The status of economic growth is dependent on the capacity of institutions, especially in case of an economic structure where state has major role in market and formulating the macroeconomic policies. Good Governance demands participation of all the actors and most of the time public institutions' role and their participation in understanding potential in economic development visa -vis in dynamic global arena is not deliberated. Moreover, economic development is mutually contributed by both public and private institutions. Scrutiny of the good governance principles and political economy of the public sector institutions, it emerges that economic governance depends on the institutional capacity building aliened with more realistic good governance principles. This practice eventually leads towards alleviating internal inefficiency and objective progress eventually reflected by the socioeconomic growth and development at large. This paper analyses the dimension of good governance with historical context to Pakistan and proposes short term and long term measures for economic and governance reforms in Pakistan

Soe Thie Nu Htwe

RELATED PAPERS

Revista Ocupación Humana

Elvia Cuartas

Olivia Saha Roy

Christoph H. Wecht

Szabolcs Guttmann

Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications

Kenneth Millett

Edukacyjna Analiza Transakcyjna

Sławomir Kania

Dine Agustine

JualObatkrimcreampenumbuhrambutbulubrewokaliskumisjenggotjambangSurabayaIndonesia

Jual Obat P E N U M B U H Rambut

Maria Dahlberg

yahya safari

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Octavian Duliu

Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam

Jurnal Fundadikdas (Fundamental Pendidikan Dasar)

Yeyen Febrilia yeyenfebrilia.2021

Computer Vision and Image Understanding

Thang Nguyen Dinh

andi saputra

Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness

Catherine Snow

BENOIT SANON´S ESSAY

ESPAGNOL POUR LES FRANCOPHONES # EFBESA

Radiation Research

David Grdina

Journal of Theoretical Biology

Frank Starmer

Cardiovascular Toxicology

Naglaa Khedr

Evangelos Dadiotis

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

HUGO MEJIA CAMACHO

Bulletin of the Brazilian Mathematical Society, New Series

Sorina Barza

Developmental Biology

nullin divecha

Health Education and Health Promotion

Mahdi Moshki

Nymia Pimentel Simbulan

June 1st, 2020, human rights as the foundation of good governance: the ironies of the philippine experience.

1 comment | 57 shares

Estimated reading time: 10 minutes

“Confronted by these challenges and difficulties, human rights defenders in the Philippines have taken steps to muster all possible support targeting various sectors in Philippine society”, writes Dr Nymia Pimentel Simbulan , Professor and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, the University of the Philippines Manila and Executive Director of Philippines Human Rights Information Centre (PhilRights).

_______________________________________________

The Rise of Populist, Autocratic, Strongman Regimes

To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity. – Nelson Mandela

The intersection of good governance and human rights is critical in the building of a robust democracy and the realization of sustainable development. While human rights provides the contents, norms and standards of good governance, good governance guided by human rights norms and principles, creates the conducive environment necessary for the State to respect, protect and fulfill human rights in a sustainable manner¹.

Human rights determines the behavior of governments as primary duty bearers — on how to conduct political affairs, processes and institutions, including what programs, plans and policies to prioritize, what laws to enact, how to allocate resources, and what structures to establish and/or strengthen. Good governance ensures opportunities, spaces and mechanisms that enhance peoples’ participation in decision-making, contribute to their empowerment, and strengthen transparency, accountability and the rule of law.

In recent years, the global community has witnessed the rise of populist, autocratic, strongman politics the likes of Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines, Donald Trump of the United States, Narendra Modi of India, and Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil.² ³

Their governance styles and approaches have seriously affected the state of democratic institutions and processes, undermining fundamental freedoms and violating the human rights of the population.

This ruling style is not by any means new; what is new is the way in which this style of governance has taken advantage of the benefits of information technology, particularly social media, in order to promote simplistic narratives that bolster their popularity.

These leaders share similar characteristics when it comes to how they project themselves, the narratives that they spread, governance strategies, and approaches to rule of law and human rights. Among these shared features are:

Projection of the head of government as a decisive leader who is strong-willed, nationalistic , i.e. putting the nation above all else, and relentless in solving the country’s problems particularly poverty, crime, and corruption, and thereby creating a “cult of personality”. According to the narrative, this leader is different from the political elite who came before him, and is therefore closer to the people. Following the assertion that the country is in crisis and confronted by problems that require urgent and decisive actions because the political elite failed to address these problems, he presents himself as someone who is determined to “do whatever it takes” to get the job done, even in ways which are “unorthodox and verge on the illegal.”⁴ His popularity is based on the use of simplistic narratives having the ability to deliver a straightforward solution to complex problems based on an approach of “shooting from the hip”.
Laying out and overemphasizing one particular problem, usually having to do with criminality, to heighten people’s sense of insecurity and fear . This then lays the foundation for the need of the decisive leader to employ state violence and legitimizes the use of deadly force to deal with criminality and terrorism. (e.g. In the US, it was the criminal hordes of migrants; in India, it was Muslims who threatened the vision of a Hindu Indian nation; in the Philippines, it is people involved in the illegal drug trade, etc.) The populist leader takes advantage of state institutions that are legally authorized to use force — law enforcement institutions and the military — and employing the narrative of a “state of emergency” to carry out campaigns of violence that require authorities to be given the license to kill in order for government to proceed with least resistance in realizing its political agenda.

According to the narrative, violence is the most effective and efficient way to produce results when it comes to addressing the country’s serious problems like illegal drugs, crimes and terrorism. But the use of state violence also has the effect of producing a shocking and chilling effect on people. By establishing an atmosphere of fear, the violence discourages citizens from going against the State and its laws; it urges people to toe the line.

Taking advantage of the discontent of citizens with the “traditional political elite” who are seen as corrupt, using their government positions to consolidate political and economic power for themselves, and failing to address poverty and inequality. The populist leader has presented himself as “different” and has capitalized on the frustration and impatience of the population over the inability of the political elite and democratic institutions to curb the growing economic inequalities in these countries.⁵ This has translated to disillusionment with democracy and the promise of democratic institutions and practices to deliver.
Promoting the narrative that human rights norms, standards and principles get in the way of real progress on these serious problems. Human rights have been viewed as obstacles in the implementation and realization of State policies, plans and programs because according to these State leaders, human rights have served to weaken the State’s “war efforts”. Since human rights have been conveniently used to attack the State while at the same time used as shields or armors to protect “enemies of the State”, “destabilizers of government”, and “terrorists”, human rights to these leaders have no place in society. Even human rights organizations have been tagged as acting as “enemies from within” because they are hampering the government’s legitimate war efforts by choosing to defend “drug addicts”, “drug lords”, “criminals”, “rapists” who have been projected as evil, and deserving to be treated in a cruel and inhumane manner befitting animals. The universality of human rights has likewise been distorted by asserting that “criminals”, “drug users”, “drug pushers”, “drug lords” are not part of humanity ⁶, while at the same time distorting what human rights are about by accusing human rights defenders as not caring about the victims of crimes.

These leaders have resorted to capitalizing on their popularity to misuse state institutions to mount attacks against critics. They have also taken steps to systematically weaken democratic institutions that are meant to act as institutional constraints on the Executive power, under the guise of “doing whatever it takes” and taking a no-nonsense approach to getting the job done.

Take the example of President Duterte who used the Department of Justice (DOJ) to go after Senator Leila De Lima and former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Ma. Lourdes Sereno, or President Trump in the US, allowing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to misuse the criminal justice system to deter activists, lawyers, journalists, and humanitarian volunteers from challenging — or simply documenting — the systematic human rights violations that US authorities have committed against migrants and asylum seekers by subjecting human rights defenders to warrantless surveillance, interrogations, invasive searches, travel restrictions, and, in isolated cases, a false arrest and unlawful detention. In so doing, they have violated the Constitution, US and international law, and DHS policies — all of which prohibit discriminatory restrictions of freedom of speech and expression. In some cases, US and Mexican authorities have reportedly collaborated in the unlawful restrictions against human rights defenders on their shared border.”⁷

Undermining the ability of the press, the Fourth Estate, to act as a counterbalance or check on government power by questioning traditional media, particularly media that is critical of government actions, and claiming that these are sources of “fake news”. These leaders use social media to disseminate propaganda, or to spread allegations meant to discredit, vilify, neutralize and/or silence their critics and opponents through the mobilization of a well-financed army of social media trolls. The strategy of constantly bombarding and saturating social and mass media with misinformation presented as “truths” has made the general public accept without question State pronouncements and assertions, even if these lack factual basis to the point of bordering on absurdity.

Reliance on these beliefs and practices has had serious consequences on peoples’ lives, livelihood, and social relations. It has likewise placed democratic institutions and processes in a precarious and unstable state.

Consequences of the Strongman Autocratic Leadership: The Philippine Experience

After the overthrow of the Marcos dictatorship in 1986 and prior to the installation of Rodrigo R. Duterte as the 16th President of the Republic of the Philippines in June 2016, the country enjoyed the reputation of having a dynamic human rights track record in Southeast Asia. This is evident by the existence of a human rights-influenced 1987 Philippine Constitution cognizant of the atrocities and human rights violations perpetrated by the Marcos government during the Martial Law period, a vibrant human rights movement, free mass media, and open democratic space. The Philippines was among the first country in Southeast Asia to establish a national human rights institution (NHRI) which has consistently enjoyed a status A accreditation by the International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights.⁸

The country has achieved major strides with the passage of numerous human rights enabling laws including the Human Rights Victims Reparation and Recognition Act of 2013 (Republic Act №10368), Anti-Torture Act of 2009 (Republic Act №9745), Anti-Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance Act of 2012 (Republic Act №10353), The Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health Act of 2012 (Republic Act №10354), Generics Act of 1988 (Republic Act 6675), Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (Republic Act 8371), and The Magna Carta of Women of 2009 (Republic Act №9710). Moreover, the Philippines is a State Party to all key international human rights laws/treaties. However, significant changes took place and continue to take place in the socio-political landscape of the country when Duterte came to power in June 2016.

Laying the foundation for the “War on Drugs”

Presenting himself as “Father of the Nation”, Duterte has claimed that the way to move forward is to be tough and decisive in dealing with the key problems besetting the Philippines. He has identified illegal drugs as among the root cause of crimes and corruption in Philippine society, an assertion that has been propagated and accepted by different sectors, even in the absence of scientific evidence and solid data. Constant reiteration and bombardment by government of the public, civil society and the international community through the use of the mass and social media, reinforced by educational and government agencies/institutions, have transformed such narratives to be “real and true”.

Because he claims to know what will work best for the country, everyone is expected not to question and oppose his actions, not even by those in government. It is also because of this image and his chauvinist posturing that women’s groups have been attacked and insulted for openly criticizing his misogynist policies, programs and approaches.

Prior to his installation into power, Duterte used a discourse of a corrupt elite coddling drug dealers and addicts, incompetent in addressing problems of poverty and inequality in society, and primarily preoccupied in further enriching themselves while in power.⁹

While distancing himself from one section of the ruling class/political elites to show how different he is, he has, at the same time, forged strategic alliances and ties with the most powerful sections of the ruling class/political elites to strengthen his control of government and pursue his political agenda.¹⁰

In this way, he has further isolated and rendered powerless any legitimate opposition. In return, he has allowed these political allies to realize their own agendas and consolidate their power within their own turfs. This can be seen in the nature of his relations with the traditional Philippine political dynastic families, the Macapagal-Arroyos, Marcoses, Villars, etc.¹¹

The “War on Drugs” and the use of state violence

Complementing the framework that the country is “in crisis” is the strategy of drawing the line between the supporters and critics of government, thereby polarizing the country . In a state of war, he has asserted either you are with us or you are against us . Those on the side of government are rewarded and protected, while those who oppose the administration are labeled “enemies of the State”, obstructionists in the “war efforts” against drugs and criminality, and are therefore deserving of experiencing the “full force of the law” and its consequences. Thus, the official policy of launching a “war on drugs and criminality”, mobilizing police and military forces, and conducting mass killings and arrest of those believed to be involved in illegal drugs, has been legitimized.¹²

The escalation of human rights violations emanating from the use of state violence in addressing the country’s problems particularly crime and terrorism, is another impact of the actions of populist, autocratic leaders, very evident in the case of the Philippines. Law enforcement institutions and the military, complemented by the use of non-state hired armed groups/individuals, have served as the principal machinery in the State-sponsored violent campaign against illegal drugs, crime and terrorism. To make this more acceptable to “polite society”, drug users and drug dealers have been cast as criminals who can no longer be redeemed and therefore no longer have human rights and should thus not be treated humanely. They are projected to be “dregs of society” that deserve to be physically eliminated in order to protect the law-abiding citizens of the country from the havoc that they otherwise would have been wreaking on society.

Operating under the instruction and protection of the Chief Executive, abuses and human rights violations in the form of killings, illegal arrest and detention, torture, and enforced disappearance, have become a normal/common occurrence, and oftentimes justified and condoned.¹³ State agents have not been made accountable for their actions in the conduct of police and/or military operations in communities, consequently, perpetuating a culture of impunity.

It is therefore not surprising that the administration continues to push for the restoration of the death penalty in the country, a priority legislative measure of the President despite the Philippines being a State Party to Optional Protocol 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which does not allow for the restoration of the death penalty once it has been abolished from the law of the country.¹⁴

The rule of law has been seriously eroded with a culture of impunity becoming deeply entrenched and institutionalized. Instead of holding State agents accountable for human rights violations perpetrated in the context of the “war on drugs”, the President has assured them protection and freedom from prosecution for their actions. He continues to condone and even encourage members of the police force in the excessive and indiscriminate use of violence resulting to torture and death of alleged drug users and/or pushers in urban poor communities.¹⁵

The President has even gone to the extent of increasing the salaries of the men and women of the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) as reward for a “job well done” in the government’s campaign against illegal drugs and terrorism.¹⁶ Meanwhile, victims of the “war on drugs”, particularly the victims of extrajudicial killings (EJKs), have been denied access to justice. To this day, families of EJK victims, children referred to as “collateral damage”, and even those admitted by law enforcement agents as killed because of mistaken identity, have not seen a single State agent prosecuted, all the more punished and made accountable for their actions. They continue to go scot free and enjoy the protection of government officials including the President.

Impact of the “War on Drugs” on democratic institutions

Democratic institutions like the legislative and judicial bodies have been weakened in a bid to bolster executive power. The principles of transparency, and check and balance, have been replaced by the avowed virtues of loyalty, obedience and subservience to ensure that the priority programs and policies of government, foremost of which is the “war on drugs and criminality” will be on track. The rhetoric propagated by government is since the “drug menace poses a clear and present danger”¹⁷ dictating the country to be on war footing, the President should be given the leeway or prerogative to determine the strategies that are considered best to address the problems to be in control or on top of the situation. There is no room for questioning and opposition, and everyone is expected to contribute to the war effort; everyone is expected to make sacrifices for the greater good. Any criticism is viewed as obstructing and taking away from the war effort which should be dealt with accordingly by the State.

Furthermore, the President’s political party and avid supporters enjoy a monopoly control over the Philippine Congress, both the House of Representatives and Senate. The principle of checks and balances has been undermined with the transformation of Congress particularly the House into a rubberstamp of the President ensuring that “what the President wants, the President gets”. The Supreme Court upheaval resulting to the ouster of Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno, and with 12 out of the 15 Justices of the Philippine Supreme Court (7 out of the 15 Justices, namely Associate Justices Andres Reyes Jr., Alexander Gesmundo, Jose Reyes Jr., Ramon Paul Hernando, Rosmari Carandang and Amy Lazaro-Javier and Henri Jean-Paul Inting with 5 more to be appointed this second half of 2019) appointed by the President before the end of 2019, is indicative of a disturbing development challenging the independence of the judiciary.¹⁸

Impact on human rights

The low tolerance for criticism and opposition has led to the shrinking of democratic space and the prevalence of an environment of fear and silence throughout the country. Freedoms of speech and expression are subtly being curtailed. Human rights defenders, mass media practitioners, and members of the political opposition who have consistently expressed contrary views, criticized government programs and policies, have not been spared from insults, embarrassment, and threats. They have been the targets of red-tagging and vilification campaigns. With the intention to malign and destroy their reputation and credibility, critics and/or opponents have likewise experienced harassment through the filing of trumped-up charges using fabricated evidences and hired witnesses.

The repulsion towards human rights and human rights defenders has led the Duterte government to virtually declare a “war against human rights”.¹⁹ It has distorted and bastardized human rights by asserting that “criminals, drug pushers, drug lords” are not humans;²⁰ threatened to kill and/or behead human rights advocates;²¹ ²²attacked and insulted international human rights bodies, officials and personalities like the UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions Agnes Callamard, and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra-ad al Hussein.²³ ²⁴ ²⁵ ²⁶

It has likewise led to the abandonment of State obligations to international human rights commitment. Last March 17, 2019, the Philippines withdrew from being a State Party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), an act openly defying the United Nations and international critics.²⁷ There are also plans to abrogate its international human rights commitments being a State Party to Optional Protocol 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, with the marching order of the President to Philippine Congress to reinstate the death penalty in the country.²⁸

The social cost of the “War on Drugs”

To date, close to 30,000 individuals²⁹ have been killed as a consequence of operations of police forces or unidentified assailants or men riding in tandem, or both, in the Philippines. The rights to life, due process, presumption of innocence, freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman treatment or punishment, freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention, are among the civil and political rights denied and violated by the State.³⁰ Meanwhile, families of victims of civil and political rights violations, particularly State-perpetrated mass killings and/or extrajudicial killings, have been further deprived of their economic and social rights like the rights to decent work and pay, rights to education, health, housing, and social security.

The poor, who have been the primary targets of the “war on drugs” of the Duterte government as evidenced by the socio-demographic profile of the close to 30,000 victims of mass killings, have experienced multiple burdens with the impact of civil and political rights violations on their economic and social rights. The death of the husband, father, son, usually the breadwinner of the family, has left behind not only stigmatized widows, traumatized children, and terrorized communities in the course of the drug campaign of the government in urban poor communities. A major consequence of the “war on drugs” on the poor is that it has exacerbated and deepened their impoverishment and marginalization. Wives and/or mothers, in addition to their being caretakers of the children and elderly, have been forced to assume the role of breadwinner formerly played by the dead family member to make both ends meet. Children, who oftentimes have witnessed the murder of their father, mother, sibling and/or relative, experience fear, shame and discrimination having its toll on family and community relations, health, and attendance and performance in school.³¹

There is no doubt that the families of the close to 30,000 victims of the “war on drugs” in the Philippines have experienced further deterioration in their poverty situation. Widows, mothers and loved ones of victims of the “war on drugs” have difficulty or are unable to find decent jobs or sources of livelihood; children are forced to drop out of school; the state of homelessness, hunger and sickness among urban poor has worsened; and possibly involvement in crimes, including the selling and/or use of illegal drugs, among the youth and young adults in urban poor communities, has deepened.³² Not to mention the impact on the state of mental health, particularly of the wives, parents, children because of the shock, disbelief, guilt, grief, of the sudden and violent death of a loved one.

Even families of victims of extrajudicial killings in the context of the “war on drugs and criminality” have decided to keep mum to injustices and repression within their midst. For fear of retribution and absence of resources to defend themselves and seek justice through the judicial system, they have chosen to leave their fate to God and/or move out of their places of residence for safer areas and to escape the punitive actions of unscrupulous law enforcement agents, many of whom are operating within the community. This attitude of passivity and resignation is dictated by their feeling of powerlessness and deprivation, a common characteristic of poor victims of State violence. Thus, in communities where there is seeming order and stability are residents engulfed and immobilized by terror, distrust and suspicion.

Ways Forward: Instituting Genuine Changes

Confronted by these challenges and difficulties, human rights defenders in the Philippines have taken steps to muster all possible support targeting various sectors in Philippine society. They have also reflected on the weaknesses and gaps of the human rights movement in the conduct of its advocacy work especially with the continuing support and popularity enjoyed by the Duterte administration from the people.

A priority course of action taken is raising peoples’ awareness and understanding of human rights and its principles through mass education and information campaigns. Human rights groups have realized the value of sustained, age-specific and creative ways of conducting human rights education and information work in order for it to be viewed as important and relevant to the lives of ordinary citizens from all walks of life.

Not only have human rights NGOs paid attention to improving and simplifying the contents and language of human rights education and information work. Methodologies in the conduct of education activities have likewise been improved or enhanced. Training on popular education techniques like the use of theater, street plays, arts, songs, games and community participation, have been incorporated in human rights education curriculum for people from all walks of life, i.e. urban poor residents, women, children, youth and students, artists, indigenous peoples, workers and peasants, church people, etc.

Human rights NGOs have also devoted much time and effort in the development and production of culturally-appropriate information, education and communication (IEC) materials for various audiences to ensure that these will complement educational activities conducted in urban poor communities, schools, workplaces, parishes, farms, etc. Details like type of materials, language, art works and designs, and lay-out are studied and adopted to suit the target audiences.

Organizing work is another measure recognized as valuable by HRDs in the Philippines. Efforts have been taken to set-up human rights task forces, ministries, committees and other types of formations in different areas and territories. These have been undertaken usually in partnership and collaboration with community organizers/coordinators, progressive church people, trade unionists, student leaders, peasant leaders, environmental activists, etc. Organizing people at various levels and scale is emphasized to contribute to peoples’ empowerment through collective actions in the defense of their rights.

Closely linked to organizing is mobilization. Peoples and communities are encouraged and assisted to prevent human rights violations and/or protect their rights. Participation in mass protest actions like rallies, demonstrations and pickets, joining lobby work in Congress, doing the rounds of schools and communities to conduct education and/or information activities, helping out in the production of IEC materials, or just simply convincing a family member, neighbor, friend to attend community forums or assemblies on social issues, are different forms of mobilization made available to peoples and communities.

A distinct form of mobilization which HRDS have provided particularly the families of victims of the “drug war” and alleged EJKs is their participation in the documentation of cases of human rights violations. This involves mobilization in the form of sharing their stories/experiences and allowing these to be documented by HRDs; convincing other victims to have their stories/experiences documented by HRDs; attending documentation training workshops conducted by HR NGOs; and/or engaging in actual documentation activities. There have also been families of victims of alleged EJKs who have gone to the extent of filing cases against known perpetrators of human rights violations through the assistance of human rights lawyers.

Concomitantly, human rights NGOs have collaborated with journalists, film makers and other media practitioners recognizing their role and contribution in disseminating the stories and experiences of the victims of human rights violations and ensuring that their narratives are not forgotten. All these in the hope of seeking justice and reparation in the future. Journalists and media practitioners have also been instrumental in humanizing victims of EJKs by being able to put names and faces behind the statistics.

Moreover, HR NGOs have taken efforts to maximize international solidarity work by participating in international conferences, forums to disseminate to the world the state of human rights of the Filipino people under the current administration. NGOs have become more active in sending delegations to U.N. activities to do lobby work and solicit support to address the human rights situation in the country. The recent resolution filed by Iceland and adopted by the UN Human Rights Council on the Philippines is an example of intensified efforts exerted by Philippine NGOs for the international community to take action on the human rights situation in the country.³³

Last but not the least is the defense and protection of HRDs against various forms of attacks from the State. HR NGOs have taken steps to enhance their capacities and competencies to defend themselves and protect their organizations through education, training, networking on personal and organizational safety and security, including digital security.

All these activities are interlinked, overlap and reinforce each other. These do not come in any order but are conducted simultaneously depending on the situation and needs of organizations, peoples and communities with the objective of eventually bringing about genuine change in Philippine society. After all, a government that thrives on state violence, lies and deception is a government founded on unstable grounds; it is a government that will eventually be discredited in history, if not rejected by the people.

1 United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Good Governance and Human Rights. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/GoodGovernance/Pages/GoodGovernanceIndex.aspx (Accessed: 12 September 2019) 2 Kenneth Roth. World’s Autocrats Face Rising Resistance. Human Rights Watch World Report 2019. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/keynote/autocrats-face-rising-resistance (Accessed: 8 Sept. 2019) 3 Joshua Kurlantzick. Southeast Asia’s Populism Is Different But Also Dangerous. Council on Foreign Relations. Nov. 1, 2018. https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/southeast-asias-populism-different-also-dangerous (Accessed: 8 Sept. 2019) 4 Inquirer.Net. Full Text: President Rodrigo Duterte inauguration speech. June 30, 2016. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/793344/full-text-president-rodrigo-duterte-inauguration-speech (Accessed: 30 Sept. 2019) 5 Aries Arugay. The 2019 Philippine Elections: Consolidating Power in an Eroding Democracy. Heinrich Böll Stiftung Southeast Asia. 21 June 2019. https://th.boell.org/en/2019/06/21/2019-philippine-elections- consolidating-power-eroding-democracy (Accessed: 9 October 2019) 6 Inquirer.Net. Criminals are not human — Aguirre. Feb. 1, 2017. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/867331/criminals-are-not-human-aguirre (Accessed: 30 Sept. 2019) 7 Amnesty International. USA: Authorities are misusing justice system to harass migrant human rights defenders. 2 July 2019. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/07/usa-authorities-misusing-justice- system-harass-migrant-human-rights-defenders/ (Accessed: 6 October 2019) 8 Commission on Human Rights. Republic of the Philippines. https://chr.gov.ph/about-chr/ (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 9 Mark R. Thompson. Duterte’s illiberal democracy and perilous presidential system. East Asia Forum. 16 April 2018. https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2018/04/16/dutertes-illiberal-democracy-and-perilous-presidential- system/ (Accessed: 6 October 2019) 10 Mark R. Thompson. Duterte’s illiberal democracy and perilous presidential system. East Asia Forum. 11 Aries Arugay. The 2019 Philippine Elections: Consolidating Power in an Eroding Democracy. Heinrich Böll Stiftung Southeast Asia. 12 Mark R. Thompson. Duterte’s illiberal democracy and perilous presidential system. East Asia Forum. 13 Christina Mendez. Duterte to PNP: Kill 1,000, I’ll protect you. The Philippine Star. July 2, 2016. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/07/02/1598740/duterte-pnp-kill-1000-ill-protect-you (Accessed: 30 Sept. 2019) 14 United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty. 15 Dec. 1989. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/2ndopccpr.aspx (Accessed: 9 October 2019) 15 Christina Mendez. Duterte to PNP: Kill 1,000, I’ll protect you. The Philippine Star. 16 Pia Ranada. Duterte signs resolution on pay hike for soldiers, cops. Rappler. January 9, 2018. https://www.rappler.com/nation/193248-duterte-signs-joint-resolution-pay-hike-soldiers-cops (Accessed: 30 Sept. 2019) 17 Christina Mendez. Duterte to PNP: Kill 1,000, I’ll protect you. The Philippine Star. 18 Edu Punay. Duterte to appoint 5 more SC justices in 2019. The Philippine Star. May 29, 2019. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/05/29/1921803/duterte-appoint-5-more-sc-justices-2019 (Accessed: 9 October 2019) 19 Associated Press. ‘I don’t care about human rights’: Philippines’ Duterte acknowledges abuses in drug war but refuses to back down. 6 Aug. 2016. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/1999755/i- dont-care-about-human-rights-philippines-duterte (Accessed: 30 Sept. 2019) 20 Agence France-Presse. Criminals are not human — Aguirre. Feb. 1, 2017. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/867331/criminals-are-not-human-aguirre (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 21 Marlon Ramos. Duterte threatens to kill rights activists if drug problem worsens. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Nov. 29, 2016. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/848933/duterte-threatens-to-kill-human-rights-activists-if-drug- problem-worsens (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 22 Trisha Macas. Duterte threatens to behead human rights advocates. GMA News Online. May 18, 2017. https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/611343/duterte-threatens-to-behead-human-rights- advocates/story/ (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 23 Paterno Esmaquell II. Philippine President-elect Duterte curses UN. Rappler. June 3, 2016. https://www.rappler.com/nation/135179-philippines-president-duterte-curses-united-nations (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 24 Nestor Corrales. Duterte hurls expletives at Callamard after her remark on Kian slay. Inquirer.net. August 28, 2017. https://globalnation.inquirer.net/160053/duterte-callamard-war-on-drugs-kian-delos-santos-killings- expletive (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 25 Felipe Villamor. Rodrigo Duterte of Philippines Calls U.N. Human Rights Chief an ‘Idiot’. The New York Times. Dec. 22, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/world/asia/rodrigo-duterte-philippines-zeid-raad-al- hussein.html (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 26 Consuelo Marquez. UN expert asks Duterte admin: Stop maligning human rights advocates. Inquirer.net. Dec. 19, 2018. https://globalnation.inquirer.net/172096/un-expert-asks-duterte-admin-stop-maligning- human-rights-advocates (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 27 Agence France-Presse. Philippines leaves International Criminal Court. Rappler. March 17, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/nation/225924-philippines-international-criminal-court-withdrawal-march-17-2019 (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 28 Pia Ranada. Duterte pushes for the return of death penalty for drug crimes, plunder. Rappler. July 22, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/nation/236024-duterte-pushes-return-death-penalty-drug-crimes-plunder-sona- 2019 (Accessed: 29 Sept. 2019) 29 Emmanuel Tupas. 29,000 deaths probed since drug war launched. The Philippine Star. March 6, 2019 https://www.philstar.com/nation/2019/03/06/1898959/29000-deaths-probed-drug-war-launched 30 United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 16 Dec. 1966. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx (Accessed: 15 Sept. 2019) 31 Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PhilRights). The Killing State: The Unrelenting War Against Human Rights in the Philippines. Sept. 2019. 32 Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PhilRights)…… 33 Sofia Tomacruz. Why Iceland led UN resolution on PH drug war killings. Rappler. July 19, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/235775-why-iceland-led-un-resolution-drug-war-killings-philippines (Accessed: 19 Oct. 2019)

REFERENCES:

Agence France-Presse. Criminals are not human — Aguirre. Feb. 1, 2017. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/867331/criminals-are-not-human-aguirre

Agence France-Presse. Philippines leaves International Criminal Court. Rappler. March 17, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/nation/225924-philippines-international-criminal-court- withdrawal-march-17–2019

Amnesty International. USA: Authorities are misusing justice system to harass migrant human rights defenders. 2 July 2019. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2019/07/usa-authorities-misusing-justice- system-harass-migrant-human-rights-defenders/

Arugay, Aries. The 2019 Philippine Elections: Consolidating Power in an Eroding Democracy. Heinrich Böll Stiftung Southeast Asia. 21 June 2019. https://th.boell.org/en/2019/06/21/2019-philippine-elections-consolidating-power-eroding- democracy

Associated Press. ‘I don’t care about human rights’: Philippines’ Duterte acknowledges abuses in drug war but refuses to back down. 6 Aug. 2016. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/1999755/i-dont-care-about- human-rights-philippines-duterte

Commission on Human Rights. Republic of the Philippines. https://chr.gov.ph/about-chr/

Corrales, Nestor. Duterte hurls expletives at Callamard after her remark on Kian slay. Inquirer.net. August 28, 2017. https://globalnation.inquirer.net/160053/duterte-callamard- war-on-drugs-kian-delos-santos-killings-expletive

Esmaquell II, Paterno. Philippine President-elect Duterte curses UN. Rappler. June 3, 2016.

https://www.rappler.com/nation/135179-philippines-president-duterte-curses-united- nations

Inquirer.Net. Full Text: President Rodrigo Duterte inauguration speech. June 30, 2016.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/793344/full-text-president-rodrigo-duterte-inauguration- speech

Inquirer.Net. Criminals are not human — Aguirre. Feb. 1, 2017.

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/867331/criminals-are-not-human-aguirre

Kurlantzick, Joshua. Southeast Asia’s Populism Is Different But Also Dangerous. Council on Foreign Relations. Nov. 1, 2018. https://www.cfr.org/in-brief/southeast-asias-populism- different-also-dangerous

Macas, Trisha. Duterte threatens to behead human rights advocates. GMA News Online. May 18, 2017. https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/611343/duterte- threatens-to-behead-human-rights-advocates/story/

Marquez, Consuelo. UN expert asks Duterte admin: Stop maligning human rights advocates. Inquirer.net. Dec. 19, 2018. https://globalnation.inquirer.net/172096/un-expert-asks- duterte-admin-stop-maligning-human-rights-advocates

Mendez, Christina. Duterte to PNP: Kill 1,000, I’ll protect you. The Philippine Star. July 2, 2016. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/07/02/1598740/duterte-pnp-kill-1000-ill- protect-you

Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PhilRights). The Killing State: The Unrelenting War Against Human Rights in the Philippines. Sept. 2019.

Punay, Edu. Duterte to appoint 5 more SC justices in 2019. The Philippine Star. May 29, 2019. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2019/05/29/1921803/duterte-appoint-5-more- sc-justices-2019

Ramos, Marlon. Duterte threatens to kill rights activists if drug problem worsens. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Nov. 29, 2016. https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/848933/duterte-threatens-to- kill-human-rights-activists-if-drug-problem-worsens

Ranada, Pia. Duterte signs resolution on pay hike for soldiers, cops. Rappler. January 9, 2018. https://www.rappler.com/nation/193248-duterte-signs-joint-resolution-pay-hike- soldiers-cops

Ranada, Pia. Duterte pushes for the return of death penalty for drug crimes, plunder. Rappler. July 22, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/nation/236024-duterte-pushes-return- death-penalty-drug-crimes-plunder-sona-2019

Roth, Kenneth. World’s Autocrats Face Rising Resistance. Human Rights Watch World Report 2019. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/keynote/autocrats-face-rising- resistance

Thompson, Mark R. Duterte’s illiberal democracy and perilous presidential system. East Asia Forum. 16 April 2018. https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2018/04/16/dutertes-illiberal- democracy-and-perilous-presidential-system/

Tomacruz, Sofia. Why Iceland led UN resolution on PH drug war killings. Rappler. July 19, 2019. https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/235775-why-iceland-led-un-resolution-drug- war-killings-philippines

Tupas, Emmanuel. 29,000 deaths probed since drug war launched. The Philippine Star. March 6, 2019 https://www.philstar.com/nation/2019/03/06/1898959/29000-deaths-probed-drug-war-launched

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Good Governance and Human Rights https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Development/GoodGovernance/Pages/GoodGovernance Index.aspx

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty. 15 Dec. 1989. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/2ndopccpr.aspx

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 16 Dec. 1966. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx

Villamor, Felipe. Rodrigo Duterte of Philippines Calls U.N. Human Rights Chief an ‘Idiot’. The New York Times. Dec. 22, 2016. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/world/asia/rodrigo- duterte-philippines-zeid-raad-al-hussein.htm

*This blog is based on Prof Simbulan’s talk delivered at the 2019 LSE Southeast Asia Forum .

*The views expressed in the blog are those of the authors alone. They do not reflect the position of the Saw Swee Hock Southeast Asia Centre, nor that of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

About the author

Professor Nymia Pimentel Simbulan is Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, University of the Philippines Manila, and Executive Director of Philippine Human Rights Information Center (PhilRights), a human rights institute which is part of Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA). PhilRights has played an important role in the abolition of the death penalty in the country in 2006. It has also played a leading role in the submission of alternative reports on economic, social and cultural rights to the UN.

great content! plus it has references which makes it more reliable

The Constitutionality of Indigenous Religious Freedom in Indonesia

June 1st, 2023.

Leadership Change in Myanmar and its Implications for Foreign Policy

August 30th, 2017.

Cast a vote, light an incense: Tracing the symbolic construction of the Vietnamese election

September 15th, 2021.

Urban resilience in a time of COVID-19 and climate change in Southeast Asia

December 29th, 2020.

IMAGES

Governance and Good Governance Free Essay Example
Essay on Good Governance
⇉Leadership is the Essence of Fostering Good Governance Essay Example
Effective Leader Role in Good Governance Essay Example
Good Governance and Planning
How to Achieve Good Governance

VIDEO

What is Good Governance by Ben Warner
Good Governance essay #shorts #ytshorts #Governance #goodgovernace #politicalscience #css #pms
Governance Matters: Making your charity stronger
หลักธรรมาภิบาล (Good Governance)
What is Good Governance?
Role of Media in Good Governance Essay {the best essay for css,pma& competitive exams }| CSS&PMS

COMMENTS

Good Governance: The Key to Effective Public Administration
Essay questions: Candidates may be asked to write an essay on a specific aspect of good governance, such as the challenges to good governance or the importance of transparency in government. Case studies: Candidates may be given a case study to analyze and asked to apply their knowledge of good governance principles to the situation described.
Good Governance Essay
The World Bank defines good governance as -. "..the one epitomized by predictable, open, and enlightened policy-making, a bureaucracy imbued with a professional ethos acting in furtherance of the public good, the rule of law, transparent processes, and a strong civil society participating in public affairs. Poor governance (on the other ...
5 ways to ensure good governance
The governors should evaluate their own performance. Review of the Head of Institution. Just as it is important to undertake self-review, it is also important to provide honest feedback to the leader of the institution, so that he or she is held accountable for the day-to-day running of the school.
Principles and Characteristics of Good Governance
How to achieve good governance. Good governance, to be effective and sustainable, must be anchored in a vigorous working democracy which respects the rule of law, a free press, energetic civil society organizations and effective and independent public bodies such as the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance, Prevention of Corruption Bureau and the Fair Trade Commission.
Governance and Good Governance Free Essay Example
Download. Essay, Pages 11 (2721 words) Views. 4323. The terms "governance" and "good governance" have been bandied about a lot recently however it is difficult to define what governance means. UNESCAP (2009) describes governance as "the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented)".
About good governance
Good governance and human rights are mutually reinforcing. Human rights standards and principles provide a set of values to guide the work of governments and other political and social actors. They also provide a set of performance standards against which these actors can be held accountable. Moreover, human rights principles inform the content ...
PDF Good Governance: The Inflation of an Idea
Good governance most generally refers to a list of admirable characteristics of how government ought to be carried out—"Sweden or Denmark on a good day, perhaps," as Matt Andrews has written. 3 Indeed, much of the concept's popularity can be linked to the positive images it embodies. For the World Bank, for example, attractive
Governance and Good Governance: A New Framework for ...
Hence, good governance is organically combined with democracy. In an autocratic system, it is possible to have good government when the system is at its best, but it is impossible to have good governance. Good governance can only be achieved in a free and democratic political system, as it cannot emerge without freedom and democracy.
Promoting Good Governance : Principles, Practices and Perspectives
The concept of good governance is interlinked with institutionalised values such as democracy, observance of human rights, accountability, transparency and greater efficiency and effectiveness of the public sector. This publication focuses on key elements of good governance. It discusses the role of public management in promoting productivity ...
PDF Good Governance: Rule of Law, Transparency and Accountability
2 Good governance: legitimate, accountable, and effective ways of obtaining and using public power and resources in the pursuit of widely-accepted social goals Rule of law: the exercise of state power using, and guided by, published written standards that embody widely-supported social values, avoid particularism, and enjoy
PDF What is Good Governance?
Effectiveness and efficiency. Good governance means that processes and institutions produce results that meet the needs of society while making the best use of resources at their disposal. The concept of efficiency in the context of good governance also covers the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment.
Good Governance Paper No. 8: How to Strengthen Oversight by Congress
Legislative oversight is fundamental to a sustainable democracy. Good government requires good oversight to ensure effective programs, intelligent spending of taxpayer dollars, and a government that can respond to the country's evolving conditions, needs, and values. When done well, fact-based, bipartisan congressional oversight can identify ...
Promoting Good Governance
Promoting Good Governance. G ood governance as expressed through factors like reliability, predictability and accountability is increasingly seen as a key factor in ensuring national prosperity. However, many aspects of the relationship between good governance and national prosperity are still poorly understood and may indeed vary across countries.
(Pdf) Good Governance and Its Impact on Economic Development: a
The need for good governance is widely recognized in today's discourses on development. The exhortation for good governance to achieve economic development is widespread. President Obama who underscored the importance of good governance to achieve economic development in African countries would no doubt prescribe the same for other countries as ...
Short Essay On Good Governance
People can not progress unless they follow the rules of good governance. Good governance is a culture that makes people act responsibly, thoughtfully and fairly. They behave with restraint and abuse of power. People in the act with authority in premeters law and take upon themselves the attention of the country and …show more content….
Human Rights as the Foundation of Good Governance: The Ironies of the
The intersection of good governance and human rights is critical in the building of a robust democracy and the realization of sustainable development. While human rights provides the contents, norms and standards of good governance, good governance guided by human rights norms and principles, creates the conducive environment necessary for the ...
(PDF) GOOD GOVERNANCE AND ITS IMPACT ON ECONOMIC ...
Abstract and Figures. Good governance is a polymorphous concept that stems from economic and political science. It is used both in the context of the management of public action and in a strategic ...
PDF CHAPTER 6 GOVERNANCE AND PUBLIC FINANCE
6.4.2.1 Public expenditure management defined. Public expenditure management includes all the components of a country's budget both at preparation and programming, sometimes called the 'upstream' and it includes 'downstream' elements such as execution; accounting, control, reporting, monitoring and evaluation.
Good Governance Free Essay Example
An example of a new mode would be to delegate regulatory tasks to an independent authority. As an example of governance modes within New Zealand we look at the public health system. In the 1980-1990 period hierarchies and markets were the main governance mode (Barnett, Tenbensel et al. 2009).
How to Achieve a Good Governance
In its civic sense, the good civic government is that which allows the society to flourish. In a civil society the rights of an individual liberty, free speech, equal opportunities, education etc. are guaranteed by the law .In a civil society collective sense of responsibility prevails. As the crisis of governance deepens and public confidence ...
Making positive changes through good governance in the Philippines
For decades, the people of the Philippines have faced countless obstacles in making positive changes to their society and government. These issues range from poverty, and lack of economic growth ...
Principles and Characteristics of Good Governance
How to achieve good governance. Good governance, to be effective and sustainable, must be anchored in a vigorous working democracy which respects the rule of law, a free press, energetic civil society organizations and effective and independent public bodies such as the Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance, Prevention of Corruption Bureau and the Fair Trade Commission.
Essay on "Good Governance" (India)
Essay on "Good Governance" (India) As the term suggests, good governance means governing the people in a way that the interests of the people of all sections are preserved rightfully. A good and generous government is one where all the individuals, in today's world say almost all the individual's rights are protected and they feel that ...