Arancina, Mark Anthony S.

March 17,2015
BASS Political Science II
Political Science 11

Indicators of Good Governance: Developing an Index of Governance Quality

at the LGU level by Rosario G. Manasan, Eduardo T. Gonzales and Romualdo B.
Gaffud aims to develop a governance quality index that focuses on the capacity
of the Local Government Units to deploy and employ resources, the efficiency
and effectiveness in delivering social services and establish a mechanism of
accountability. The authors first sought to establish a conceptual framework to
define key observable dimensions of governance, then reduced it to its principle
elements and finally defining a limited number of indicators which have been
examined by criteria of specificity, universality, quantifiability, credibility, simplicity,
acceptability to capture the essence of each element. The approach used in the
study was an adaptation of Gaffud’s objective tree approach that measures three
primary objective: optimize resource support, efficiency and effectiveness and
accountability to three LGU cluster, each consisting of three jurisdictions -
provincial, city government and municipality. The clusters were chosen base on
the results of their Human Development Index. The governance quality index
developed in this study has two versions; both different at strategic objective 2.
SOII version 1 uses the approach of client satisfaction through public opinion
surveys while not ignoring administrative data. Version 2, on the other hand,
relies heavily on administrative data and defines SOII in terms of (1) the
adequacy of services provided and (2) the presence of a strong vertical linkage
with national government agencies (Manasan, et al. 1999). Results of the pilot
tests show that the GQI ranking is consistent with the ranking of LGUs base on
the Human Development Index.

I have sought to reflect three key elements from this study: the elements of
good governance, the governance quality index and the limitations of this study.

It is very evident in the Philippine society the incidence of poverty in

thresholds with over 24.4% in 2003 to 26.9 % in 2006. Although it has been
gradually declining over the past years, existing levels remain high. Some of the
causes of poverty in the country, are low to moderate economic growth for the
past 40 years, failure to fully develop the agriculture sector, high inflation during
crisis periods, high levels of population growth, recurrent shocks and exposure to
risks such as economic crisis, conflicts, natural disasters, and “environmental
poverty.” (Asian Development Bank 2009). According to a news article of Rappler
regarding poverty in the country, two provinces coming from region VIII are
included in the list of the poorest provinces in the country: Eastern Samar ranking
3rd with over 59.4% and Northern Samar ranking 12 th with over 43.7%.

So how does this relate to the study?

 Accountability on the part of government officials in LGUs should be
responsible for government behaviour and it is imperative to answer the needs of
the society (Manasan, et al. 1999). Poverty is the priority concern of most filipino
households. In this sense, government officials should mend this problem by
prompting citizen participation to address their concerns and mending this
problem through programs,projects etc such as making programs to help elevate
the agricultural sector in most rural areas or establishing more local businesses
for additional revenue since LGUs are faced with greater expenditure
responsibilities and providing social services is largely determined by financial
resources. However, there is the risk of neglect on the part of government
officials to address the concerns of the public. So it is imperative for the public to
probe into the government’s behaviour and ensure that transparency is
promoted. Otherwise, the consequences of a distorted relationship between the
public will cause an upheaval of the public or much worse, intensify the already
worse situation of poor families.
The presence of a legal framework does not always guarantee good
governance, however, ensuring the policies and regulations are upheld is an
indication of quality in the management of the LGU. An example is that of Davao
City where the government officials are strict in implementing the law resulting to
peace which has lasted for years.
Lastly, LGUs today do not assume more steering functions such as in rural
areas where there is an occurrence of either neglect of the government or lack of
training and a foundation of strategies in leading society. In other words, the
focus of LGUs is to make more fair and consistent policies and making sure that
the policies are upheld, and putting more social and economic institutions into
motion (Manasan et al. 1999).
Having these elements of good governance integrated in LGUs, the GQI
developed in this study is an effective way of tracking the progress of LGUs.
Though there is a loss of specificity, the authentic results obtained from the
results of the pilot tests in the study show that there is a correlation between
urbanization in some LGUs and the social development in them. For example,
Naval which is highly urbanized compared to other municipalities in Biliran, have
similarities between the standard of living of the people and the level of
development of the municipality. Base on my observations, the municipality of
Naval and the people seem to develop synchronously. However, the focal point of
the index used in this study is limited to output “ or end points, which means
factors contributing the results and reasons explaining why some LGUs perform
better than others are not supplied. Nevertheless, the aim here is not to compare
the levels of development between LGUs but to elevate the situation of poor and
underdeveloped LGUs.

References:
Manasan, R., Gonzales, E., & Gaffud, R. (1999). Indicators of Good Governance: Developing an
Index of Governance Quality at the LGU Level. Journal of Philippine Development, 26(2), 1-64
Ordinario, C. (2013, April 27). The Poorest provinces in the Philippines. Rappler. Retrieved from:
http://www.rappler.com/business/27276-poorest-provinces-philippines
Asian Development Bank (2009) Poverty in the Philippines: Causes,
Constraints and Opportunities. Mandaluyong City, Philippines