Analytical Framework - Essay Example

Analytical Framework Analytical framework is a set of techniques, tools and patterns that give the relationship between different variables in the organization (Enderlein, Walti & Zurn, 2010, p. 138). This study examines the application of social capital model to analyse the performance of devolved political institutions of governance in Britain. The social capital model has been used to show the relationship between the civics and the national government, assess the impact of devolution of governance on social institutions and how they impact democracy (Bontenbal, 2009). The application of social capital model as an analytical tool in devolution will help the analysts to assess how effective the government can achieve its objectives of democratising and developing the nation. Social capital analytical framework is essential in examining the benefits a nation can accrue from communal interactions between individuals and groups in different regions of the nation (Keefe Zacher, 2008, p. 17). An example is where through social interactions some people assist others to secure employment. The social capital model can be viewed in different dimensions. On personal social capitalistic view, this model focuses on how individuals and families social interactions influence the resources available for to them. However, in a political point of view the social capital model focuses on how individuals’ interactions generate benefits for the entire community in the form of bonds and trust and elevated points of cooperation. The social capital framework focuses on how individuals can strip off personal interest and work together for the benefit of the entire society (Terrence, 2002, p.57). However, in order to get people work for the general good of the community requires the establishment of well structured social institutions that motivates people to work as a team for common interest of the society. The analytical framework helps the reader to understand the criteria used by the political leaders to delegate political responsibilities to the new parliament in Scotland and the assembly of Wales. The distribution of power has used bottom-up strategy to assess the implications of the constitution and politics among the people (Terrence, 2002, p.62). The author has used analytical framework to elaborate how the Britain Government has distributed power to various areas in the country and gives the analysis of the extent to which that power has been applied to transform those regions. The model uses economics, sociology and political approach to examine the effectiveness of devolution in the target areas of Great Britain. The article uses social capital analytical framework to assess the political and constitutional implications of delegating responsibilities to different government institutions. The social capital model assumes solid teamwork and spread bonds of trust and corporation in that area (Scott, 2001, p. 84). This model will assist in assessing the effectiveness of devolved government in different areas of Great Britain. The framework examines the extent procedure of devolution in specific areas of Great Britain and the significance of institutions and culture in promoting flourishing autonomous supremacy (Enderlein, Walti & Zurn, 2010, p. 164). The Attlee government played a significant role for establishing current welfare state hence this will make the new labour be recognized for constitutional restructuring. Some of the key reforms established in the constitution include waving of the voting rights of hereditary peers in the House of Lords, accommodating the "European convention on human rights" into the UK laws, legislation of the bill on a freedom of information and distribution of political powers to a range of new bodies at regional levels. The author has used analytical model to explain the roles of the various regional political leaders and describe what is expected of those political leaders. Different regional assemblies have different constitutional mandate within their areas of jurisdiction (Bontenbal, 2009). For example, the Scottish parliament has a duty of primary legislation and partial authority to raise tax. On the other hand, Welsh assembly has been entrusted with the responsibility over executive fictions formerly held by Secretary of state for Wales. The purpose of devolution of authority across regions of Europe is to give different regions particular roles to play in line with the national authority (Olowu & Sako, 2002, p. 24). Since different regions perform unique fiscal and political roles this has altered the administrative roles of the leaders and the capacity of citizens to influence the issue of governance in a consequential manner through state or local institutions. Another characteristic of devolution is that it will occur in phases. The devolution started with Celtic nations and then English regions (Terrence, 2002, p. 67). The social capital analytical model gives an idea of the role of social capital in addressing social issues such as puberty and crimes in the urban areas, incompetent government and economic development. The challenge of establishing lean social institutions is on how to bring individuals to pursue communal interests, as opposed to individual interest. The social bonds of trusts, corporation and social cohesion can be established through a political culture in which there is an intense system of associations achieved through membership in different civic and cultural organizations (Olowu & Sako, 2002, p. 28). This social capital model has recognized horizontal integration that is based on the belief that people in different regions are well placed to perform some functions that others. It is for this cause that different regions of Britain have been given different political functions to perform through devolution of constitution. When individuals are assigned the functions they are best suited in, this will result to improvement in overall performance of the national governance hence increase the benefits of the society through social connections. The social capital framework model enables the government to design the devolution process for the benefit of the entire nation. The construction of firm institutions of social capital will lead to the establishment of steady and thriving democratic organization (Sorensen & Triantafillou, 2013). This social capital will promote good governance by transforming the populace into “consumers of politics” by minimizing the transaction costs of conforming to the policies and streamlining the bureaucratic effectiveness ad accommodating more experts in governance. Social capital is both a private and public goods. As a private good, the utility of social capital by some individuals creates externalities in the society (Carswell & Hannan, 2008). This has created difficulties in differentiating understanding the source and the benefits of social capital. Also, this creates a challenge in determining the function of the government in maintaining and strengthening social capital. The use of social capital model in political analysis is essential in understanding the position of the state on social capital. Some theorists have argued that the state is the destroyer of social capital. The analytical model examines the role of government in creating the social capital and the approach through which they can achieve it. In order t understand the importance of social capital the analysis focus on the success and failures of institutions through devolution. Devolution of powers among different social institution in Britain has followed social capital model hence this analysis will provide the difference between success and failures of social capital and the effort of the state in promoting social capital. There are various means of assessing the achievement of social capital. For example, the participation of citizens in voting exercises out of free will. The focus of social capital model is to examine the level of civic engagement in issues of national significance, citizen’s trust on the government and the associational activities (Enderlein, Walti & Zurn, 2010, p. 172). The analysis requires longitudinal measurement of the data obtained from various regions in order to establish the primary values of civic involvement. The use of voting participations of the public as a measure of civic engagement in Britain is of the essence because in Britain voting is a voluntary exercise. The voters cannot participate in an activity which they have less interest in. Therefore, the rate of participation of voters in election exercises depicts the confidence that citizens have on the government and the social capital at large. The European participation at national level is greater that the turnout at the civic level ad this could be an implication that regional voters feel more obliged to participate in the national election than in civic elections (Terrence, 2002). Voting is a political activity hence those who participate in voting are discharging political responsibility. Civil engagement in national political issues is dependent on the individual’s understanding of their regions and the importance they have for that region. Some people will want to participant in national activities because they feel that the regions where they come from deserve a share in the national activities (Terrence, 2002, p. 71). Therefore, their participation in the national activities is a way of expressing themselves at the national government. Also, it is a way of expressing their trust on the government. Trust is built through interaction and sharing of common norms for the people whom similar political affiliations and deeper trust for one another than those who hold nothing as a joint. Therefore, civic participation depicts the trusts of citizens on the government (Carswell & Hannan, 2008). On the other hand, the government is liable for making policies and the citizen’s trust on government is an implication of the benefits they derive from the government. Regional devolution may result to both social and political of government institutions hence resulting to effective democratic systems. The social capital model has a theoretical connotation that difference in economic performance in various regions of the nation is contributed by variations in social capital in those regions (Sorensen & Triantafillou, 2013, p. 41). This social capital model raises an issue of whether the existing institutions have a low probability of a better performance than those institutions to be established. The devolved structures are more fragile in areas where the introduction of social capital is inadequate. Where the social capital and democratic freedom work together there is a higher level of institutional performance. In order to achieve the desired success the government should ensure that both formal and informal institutional coexists together and explore the means to make those institutions more effective (Keefe Zacher, 2008, p. 23). Devolution of government will result to greater local control over the government matters hence improve the government performance. On the other hand, lack of social capital will limit citizen’s participation in the government affairs; reduce government trust and less government involvement in the regional level. The strength of institution analytical framework is that it shows the civic response to the existing policies and assesses the support of the government policies by the citizens through policy endowment (Sorensen & Triantafillou, 2013, p. 52). This gives the government an opportunity to determine the changes they can make across the institutions of governance to achieve desired goals. The weakness of the institutional framework is that it does not differentiate the performance attained through existing institutions from the performance of the newly established institutions. This limits the ability to understand how issues such as the extent in which the devolution of governance has influenced democracy in Britain (Scott, 2001, p.56). This framework can be applied in other areas such as evaluating the achievement of government policies such as education or healthcare policies and so on. The government can use this model to determine the areas of the economy where the government should take immediate action to influence performance of different institutions. In conclusion, devolution of governance results to democratic governance that involves more civics in the government affairs. The devolved government will increase performance of the government and trusts of the civics on the government. A further research is necessary to establish the achievement of devolution in a more democratic rule. However, the framework is effective because it provides a comparison of government achievements and the civics supports of the government activities. List of References Bontenbal, M. 2009. The Cities as Partners: Challenge to Strengthen Urban Governance through North-South City Partnerships. Eburon Uitgeverij B.V. Pp. 259-278 Carswell, D. & Hannan, D. 2008. The Plan: Twelve Months to Renew Britain. Lulu.com. Pp. 12- 24 Enderlein, H. Walti, S. & Zurn, M. 2010. Handbook on Multi-Level Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. Pp. 121-197 Keefe, T. J., Zacher M. W. 2008. The Politics of Global Health Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, May 13, Pp.15-47 Olowu D. & Sako, S. 2002. A Better Governance and Public Policy: The Capacity Building for Democratic Renewal in Africa. Kumarian Press. Pp. 18-34 Scott, W. R. 2001. Institutions and Organizations. SAGE, pp.47-132 Sorensen, E. & Triantafillou, P. 2013. The Politics of Self-Governance. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 30-54 Terrence, C. 2002. The Devolution and Social Capital in the British Regions. Regions and Federal Studies. Pp. 55-78 Read More