Good Governance: As if People Matter 1

Dr. Prakash Louis

Governance and People

Governance and good governance have become the theme of discussions, deliberations
and discourse at the local, national and international levels. Good governance, people
centred governance, responsive governance all call for collective sense of destiny and
direction for human beings. Crisis in governance witnessed all over the globe has called for
re-examination of broader tenets of governance. Malgovernance does not only affect the day
to day delivery of goods and services to the citizens of a country. It fundamentally alters the
principles of politics for the good of all.

Good governance refers to the ability to deliver goods to the stakeholders. When we talk of
good governance we are referring to the elimination of malgovernance and the
establishment of good governance through democratic processes and rule of law so that
citizens of a country and members of a society do not suffer. To talk of good governance is
to make the various agents of political system work for the betterment of all the citizens
especially of the marginalised and the vulnerable communities. Good governance is
enhancing the ability of the people to gain better and dignified life, greater options to choose
from and ensuring transparency in administration etc.

At one time, the notion of ‘governability’ was also used to discuss the facets of good
governance. The concept of governability directs attention to a state’s capacity to govern.
For the Indian situation, the issues of its growing crisis of governability will refer to three
types of problems: 1) the absence of enduring coalition; 2) policy ineffectiveness, 3) an
incapacity to accommodate political conflict without violence.2 One way of measuring
governability is to set up standards whereby some objective definition of a society’s
problems would be sought and against which the capacity of a government to solve
problems would be assessed. Most governments would fall short of these goals. A political
establishment that repeatedly fails to fulfill their stated objective is deemed to be a
government with a low capacity to govern. It is at this juncture that crisis engulfs the
government, which in turn affects not only the state but also the society.

In many of the political discourses, good governance is equated to political convenience, that
is, performing well so as to continue to remain in power. This is the political compulsion
before the political parties, due to which they engage in political manipulations. It is also not
weighing things on the cost-benefit analysis as if people do not matter. Good governance is
ensuring a better today and a brighter future for all the citizens. In the Asia-Pacific region in a
special way local governance has generated a great deal of interest among the people,
since it is the localised communities that represent the aspirations and hopes, culture and
society of people.

It is of seminal significance to note this fact that Governance is wider than government,
though government because it is the most powerful and coercive institution continues to be
the major element of any system of governance. Government according to political theories
refers to 3 sectors – executive, legislative and judiciary. But this seems to be only the
operational principles of government. Because, if it is accepted that government is for the
people, by the people and of the people, then it is the people, or the citizens who become
the central focus of any governance. To talk about good governance means ensuring the
responsibility and accountability of various stakeholders like the community, the government,
the civil society and the corporate sector. But the million-dollar question is it possible?

There is another trend that needs to be taken note of in a discourse on governance. In the
era of privatization, globalisation, free market, contracting out labour and capital, structural
adjustment, decentralisation, restructuring, deregulation, sustainable development,
empowerment etc., formulation and implementation of public policy that is policy that
benefits the public seem be to increasingly delegated to or undertaken by non-governmental
institutions. State is abdicating its responsibility and corporate sector in a special way is
entering into service sector areas. While this is a welcome sign, there is also the need to
exert pressure on the government and political establishment to deliver goods to the
common masses.

It was also taken for granted that in most of the nations that bureaucracy stands committed
to a set of values enshrined in the constitution. The administrative structure in many
countries could be relied upon for ensuring good governance, people oriented governance.
But the whole set of values for which the bureaucracy stands committed is under the threat
of displacement in the name of liberalisation. In other countries where other primordial
identifies are surfacing either in terms of racism, casteism, regionalism and regionalism, the
bureaucracy itself is undergoing major change. In modern state where traditional or
communitarian forms of administrative structures are sacrificed for the sake of state
administration, it becomes all the more essential to insist upon good governance.

The ever sharpening understanding of good governance not only recognizes the plurality of
actors involved in the process of governance, they also address themselves to the
substance of governance. This means, governance is no longer simply equated with civil
service reform, or with the application of management strategies devised in the private
sector to public organisations. Instead now there is a greater emphasis on participation,
decentralisation, accountability, and governmental responsiveness, and even broader
concerns such as those of social equality and justice. This new emphasis has been
facilitated by a parallel process: the discrediting of the conventional definition of development
as economic growth, and the adoption by international agencies, of the human development
perspective associated with the writings of Amitya Sen and Mahbub-ul-Haq, most recently
linked also with the agenda of human rights.

In the recent past, many political establishments have been caught in scams and scandals,
with leaders amassing wealth, resources and power. The magnitude of the systematic fraud,
deceit, chicanery, embezzlement and theft is shocking. Moreover, this appropriation of public
funds directly affects the social sector investments in general and the poor in particular. In
this regard good governance also refers to accountability and transparency. Thus the basic
principles of good governance are equality, justice, prosperity and democracy. These
principles are ensured through participation, decentralisation, accountability and
transparency.

In a developing country like India, governance concerns necessarily have a wide ambit. The
recognition that governance takes place in domains other than that of exclusively formal
institutionalised political and administrative structures means that governance concerns
encompass a variety of spheres. These include the political (equal application of rule of law,
accountability and transparency, the right to information, and corruption in public life); the
economic (corporate governance, the regulation of private sector, and financial markets); the
civil society (in its various manifestations, not excluding uncivil associations)3. It is these
aspects that would lead to long term sustainability of communities, societies, nations and the
universe at large.
Good Governance and Sustainable Development

The Draft Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development

considers the following as the three basic components of sustainable development:
a) economic development,
b) social development,
c) environmental protection.

The Draft Plan further states that these three components are interdependent and mutually
reinforcing. Poverty eradication, changing unsustainable patterns of production and
consumption, and protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and
social development are overarching objectives of and essential requirements for sustainable
development.4

Even a cursory glance at the development path that humanity has taken indicates that
development is turning into disaster. The Global Environment Outlook Report (GEO –1997)
prepared by the United Nation’s Environment Programme (UNEP) sounds a warning signal.
“The use of renewable resources – land, forest, fresh water, coastal areas, fisheries and
urban air – is beyond their natural regeneration capacity and therefore it is unsustainable”. A
group of most distinguished scientists in the year 1992 issued a statement warning, “The
environment is suffering critical stress. The irreversible loss of species, which by 2100 may
reach one-third of all species now living, is especially serious”.

This goes to state that the present paradigm of development is unsustainable and not viable.
At the same time, the present unsustainable development is deeply rooted in inequalities.
For instance, “The United States consumes nearly 3 times as much iron ore as India, 4.6
times as much steel, 3.6 times as much coal, 12 times as much petroleum, 3 times as many
head of cattle and sheep, and 1.7 times as much roundwood. The United States has less
than one-third the population of India, so per capita consumption differences are significantly
larger. In particular, U.S. consumption of all sources of fossil energy is so large that per
capita emission of carbon dioxide, a principal greenhouse gas, is 19 times that of India”.5

In comparison to the aggressive consumption pattern of the US, in 50 countries with almost
40% of the world’s population, more than one-fifth of children under the age of five are
underweight. In 1997-99 an estimated 815 million people were undernourished. School
enrolment is on the rise. But among the 680 million children of primary education age, 113
million are not in school- 97% of them in developing countries. Of the world’s estimated 854
million illiterate adults, 544 million (63.7%) are women. This goes to reiterate the fact that the
voices of women have less impact than men’s in the decisions that shape their lives.6

Moving from the international scenario if one looks at the national scenario, each country
presents a dismal picture with regard to unequal distribution of the fruits of development.
Here below we present some data about health sector in India.
• 9,000 young children die everyday and out of it 1/3rd of the child death take place in
India.
• While the government claims that 80% of villages have safe drinking water, 1 million
children die each year from diarrhea caused by drinking unclean water.
• While the government claims that 90% of immunization coverage has taken place, 2 lakh
infants die of tetanus.
• Only 1 in 3 mothers are attended to by trained attendants at the time of childbirth.7

From the above presentation, it can be argued that present form of development is both
unsustainable and unequal. On the one hand, there is highly unsustainable life-style,
pursued by most people in rich countries and a small minority in poor countries. These could
be termed as ‘global consumers’. On the other hand, what is fundamental is that there are
powerful business interests whose heavy profits are tied to the perpetuation of this wasteful
life style and sustainable resource use. Thus, the poor and the marginalised all over the
globe pay for the consumption of a small minority of elite.

Economic Crisis and Governance

In the recent past, World Bank and Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) have become the great proponents of good governance. The World Bank has
identified three aspects of governance: 1) the form of political regime; 2) the process by
which authority is exercised in the management of a country’s social and economic
resources for development. 3) The capacity of the government to design, formulate and
implement policies and discharge functions [World Bank 1992:3]8. But in reality when the
World Bank speaks about good governance it speaks for imperialism, speaks in favour of
structural adjustment.

The OECD uses the World Bank definition of governance with the following links: legitimacy
of government (degree of democratisation), accountability of political and official elements of
government (media freedom, transparent decision making, accountability mechanisms),
competence of governments to formulate policies and deliver services, and respect for
human rights and rule of law (individual and group rights and security, framework for
economic and social activity, and participation).9

These assertions with local variations have universal application. Interestingly all of them are
contrary to the concept of good governance.10 While the international financial corporations
speak about human rights as being part of good governance, it is mostly as an appendix,
than as central reality. Moreover, this is an attempt to use concepts of social sector so that
their ideology is sold.

This can be demonstrated from the exchange that is taking place between the Trans-
National Companies (TNC) and the developing worlds. There are 3 major assertions about
the relations between TNCs and the host countries in third world. 1) The benefits of foreign
investments are ‘poorly’ (or unfairly or unequally) distributed between the multinational and
the host or the country pays ‘too high’ a price for what it gets or the company siphons off an
‘economic surplus’ that could otherwise be used to finance internal development. 2)
Multinational corporations create distortions with the local economy. This is done in four
ways: a) TNCs pre-empt the development of an indigenous economic base by squeezing out
local entrepreneurs in the most dynamic sectors of the host country economy; b) TNCs
employ inappropriate capital-intensive technologies adding to host country unemployment; c)
TNCs worsen the distribution of income in the host country or even produce an absolute loss
for the lower 40 %; d) TNCs alter consumer tastes and undermine the culture of the host
country. 3) Foreign investors prevent or subvert host country political processes i) by
coopting the local elites; and or ii) by using their influence in their home countries to bring
pressure to keep host government ‘in line’ and or iii) by structuring the international system
respond to their multinational needs to the determent of host authorities.11

The World Bank document in its discussion of the symptoms of ‘poor governance’ identified
the following: the failure to make separation between public and private, thereby facilitating
the appropriation of public resources for private gains; the failure to establish a predictable
framework of law and government conducive to development; excessively regulatory rules
which impede the functioning of markets; misallocation of resources following from priorities
not consistent with development; and non-transparent decision making.12

Challenges faced by Good Governance

Since the political establishment is habituated to be the central source of power, wants to
control the fate of all the citizens it is not easy for the politicians to give up power. In the past,
participation in electoral politics was considered to be central reality of good governance.
While this is true, good governance today involves participation in electoral democracy,
ensuring the benefit of development to all the citizens and making the rulers accountable to
the lives and hopes of the public. The citizens of a country also could get so used to be ruled
by the power elite, that they might not like to take the responsibility of governing themselves.
More than ever the local situation is extremely interconnected with the national and
international milieu. Hence, today many nation states also can not exercise their sovereignty.
At this juncture it is a tall claim that good governance can be ensured everywhere.

Nirja Jalal in the discussion on governance looks at social indicators. Social inequality in
India both retards balanced development and distorts the logic of democracy. It is precisely
this distorting logic of democracy in an unequal society that necessitates state welfare for the
protection of the vulnerable, for the concerns of distributive justice can not be fulfilled by
governance alone. The answer therefore is not to look towards the state, but at different
ways of approaching and defining both democracy and development: a view of democracy,
for instance, that goes beyond the procedural to seek the substantive democratisation of not
only the state, but also society and social relations; and a view of development that possibly
departs from the conventional ways of measuring this goal by focusing not on GDP and
GNP, but on the enlargement of human capabilities and the enhancement of the quality of
life for all citizens. The multiple meanings these concepts have acquired in particular
societies have emerged out of rich histories of political practical practice and discourse.
Concerns of governance must necessarily be deeply imbricated in these meanings and
definitions.13

Decentralized Governance and Development

For community based development, good governance becomes very important and
simultaneously it is at the local community level good governance is operationalised in its
total capacity. Community based development is people side development. Here people are
not only the beneficiaries of the schemes and plans worked out by someone unknown to
them who are usually referred to as ‘those who govern’ but they are the planners,
implementers and also one who evaluate it and plan for the future.

One of the important issues any good governance has to address is poverty alleviation and
in a special way rural poverty reduction. The following are some of the areas that need
specific focus:

1. Rural poverty reduction increasingly requires better allocation and distribution of

resources. Jal, jungle and zamin par adhikar, that is, control over resources like water,
land and forest. There is an irrefutable connection between the asset distribution and
poverty alleviation.
2. Institutions, markets, technology policy and asset arrangements need to reflect the
critical role of food security. We have to go further and call for food sovereignty.
3. Increased growth alone will not lead to alleviation of poverty. How this growth is
redistributed to all the segment of the population is the crucial aspect.
4. The most disadvantaged and vulnerable groups should get the priority in terms of
poverty alleviation porgrammes. Often times these are the people who are real
producers, but do not have access to what they produce.
5. Partnership and participation is the strategy that would ensure the over all efforts to
reduce poverty.14
6. Finally, poverty alleviation can not be looked at only from the perspective of economic
parameters as is being done now. Poverty is fundamentally a social and political
problem. Its economic shade is only the symptom. This means the restructuring of the
 social order alone will address the elimination of poverty and misery from the face of the
earth.

Local Civil
Communit Society
y

Private/
Government Corporate
Sector

A Paradigm for Decentralised Development

Good governance also calls for a decentalised development and administration. This form of
governance would ensure that the citizens are not just objects of development but subjects
who take responsibility of their lives and their development. The above-presented diagram
explicitates the need to build interface between various stakeholders in a society. Within the
given political system usually one highlights the interaction between the government and the
people. But the discourse on local governance and decentralised governance laid equal
stress on all the four agents of development.

In a democratic polity one way of measuring the governability of a government is to judge a

government’s performance on issues that the government itself defines as areas of priority.
This is all the more true of democratic governments than military regimes because
democratic form of government is supposed to be ‘rule of the people’. With the swift changes
that are taking place at the local, national and international levels governance would be
tested by ethnic clashes, demand for separate identity, nation within nation, federal vs.
unitary forms of governments, development vs. sustainable development etc.15

The ability to deal with dissent and protest, which is part of identity politics as well as
generated by civil society is another that poses challenge to good governance. Within a
democratic political system dissent is provided space and the causes of dissent are
addressed to in a long-term solution manner than just crisis management. On the other
hand, the absence of open violence, especially in non-democratic settings, does not
necessarily indicate a government that governs well, but an increase in politically oriented
violence in a more or less open polity nearly always indicates a growing crisis of
governability. It indicates that the state does not possess the institutions necessary for
peaceful resolution of the society’s normal political conflict.

A developing country, which is democratic in its polity, is well governed if its government can
simultaneously sustain legitimacy, promote socio-economic order and maintain order without
coercion. In sum, good governance refers to non-partisan and active legislative bodies,
independent judiciary, free print and electronic media, constitutionally guaranteed system of
decentralisation and devolution of power to all levels of governance, direct democratic
accountability at the local levels, and a vibrant and vigilant civil society. In good governance
the common masses are the central focus of all development, their political participation is
ensured.

Search for Alternatives

• Both in terms of good governance and sustainable development, WTO is an entirely

inappropriate institution to address issues of agriculture, food production, distribution etc.
It is a known fact that the WTO will not engage in profound reform in order to make itself
responsible to rights of common people. Hence, these decisions need to be left to people
themselves.
• Enhance the power of the global family to protect democratically instituted governments
and resist imposition of autocratic governments in the name of good governance.
• Place people at the centre of development and participants in their own governance.
• Promote at the local, national, regional and international levels a more just and equitable
distribution of income and access to resources and democratic participation of all
especially of the marginalised.
• Empower the youth, women and the marginalised communities to enhance their socio-
economic and political power for sustainable development and good governance.

The above-presented arguments are preliminary in nature and are raised here to continue
the discourse for enhancing good governance especially to address the issues of common
person. Hence, it is imperative that we raise more questions for centalising the discourse on
governance. How can we structure the governance systems in order to make these more
people-oriented and responsive to people’s needs? How can the people move from the
periphery to the centre of the governance system? How can an administrative culture be
evolved that would be conducive to the people’s participation in the formulation,
implementation and evaluation of schemes of governance? How can a motivated clientele
be created in and around an administrative system? And in this ambience, how does a
people-centred governance system emerge and function?16 These are the questions that
need to be addressed seriously if good governance has to be ensured.

Taken together, good governance is intimately linked to viable, sustainable and attainable
development. Any emphasis on one at the cost of other would be detrimental to saving the
universe and ourselves. The civil society is called upon to ensure good governance and
sustainable development at all levels. Would the civil society stand up to the test is a million-
dollar question.

Dr. Prakash Louis

Executive Director
Indian Social Institute
10, Institutional Area
Lodi Road, New Delhi 110 003
Tel: 4625015, 4622379
Email: prakash@unv.ernet.in
prakashlouis@hotmail.com
1
. This is the revised version of the paper presented in the Workshop organised by International Jesuit
Network for Development (IJND) during the World Summit on Sustainable Development at
Johannesburg August- September 2002.
2
. Atul Kohli. Democracy and Discontent: India’s Growing Crisis of Governability. Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge, 1990, p 22-24.
3
. Niraja Gopal Jalal and Sudha Pai (ed). Democratic Governance in India: Challenges of Poverty,
Development and Identity. Sage Publications: New Delhi, 2001.
4
. United Nations. World Summit on Sustainable Development. Draft Plan of Implementation of the
World Summit on Sustainable Development, p 2.
5
. World Resources 1994-95. New York: Oxford University Press, 17.
6
.Human Development Report 2002. New York: Oxford University Press.
7
. Alternative Economic Survey 1995-96.
8
. D. Bandyopadhyay. Administration, Decentralisation and Good Governance. Economic and Political
Weekly, November 30, 1996, p 3109.
9
. World Bank. Governance: The World Bank Experience, World Bank Publication, 1994, p xix.
10
. D. Bandyopadhyay. Administration, Decentralisation and Good Governance. Economic and
Political Weekly, November 30, 1996, p 3114.
11
. Theodore H. Moran (ed). Governments and Transnational Corporations, Vol. 7, UN, 1994, p 86,
90, 97.
12
. World Bank. Governance and Decision-making. Washington 1992, p 9.
13
. Niraja Gopal Jayal in the article “The Governance Agenda: Making Democratic Development
Dispensable”, Economic and Political Weekly, February 22, 1997, p 412.
14
. Adapted from Rural Poverty Report 2001: The Challenge of Ending Rural Poverty. Oxford
University Press 2001.
15
. Refer to Kousar J. Azam (ed). Federalism and Good Governance: Issues Across Cultures. South
Asian Publishers: New Delhi, 1998.
16
. Ramesh K. Arora (ed). People-Centred Governance. Aalekh Publishers: Jaipur 2001.