Political Economy of International Development - Essay Example

Political Economy of International Development Governance Governance is the exercise of administrative, political and economic authority for purposes of managing the affairs of a country at every level (UNDP, 1997). It is made up of processes, institutions and mechanisms through which the citizenry articulate their opinions, interest and exercise their legal rights. The duty of governance is meeting the obligations presented to it by the citizenry and mediating differences that occur in the society. UN (2006) states that contemporary governance is not the responsibility of government’s alone; rather, it takes the efforts of government, the civil society and the private sector to attain it. The state’s role in governance according to the UNDP is to create a favourable legal and political environment, while the civil society mobilises groups to take part in financial and political activities, the private sector takes on the role of job and income generation. The World Bank (2003) defines governance as a method through which the leaders in specific countries exercise power in the management of social, economic and political resources for the sake of development. According to the World Bank (2003), governance can only be positive if issues such as accountability and transparency are upheld by the governing class. Pierre (2000) on the other hand defines governance as “the sustainable coordination and coherence among a wide variety of actors with different purposes and objectives”. The actors Pierre refer to include politicians, political institutions, the civil society, the non-governmental organisations and other interest groups. Hirst (2000) however asserts that governance is the means through which a group of activities or an activity is directed or controlled for purposes of delivering acceptable outcomes that meets already established standards. Overall, the different definitions of governance indicate that it is broader than the government. This is especially so because players like the civil society and the non-governmental organisations takes up some of the traditional government roles. This however sets an environment where the traditional state of governments has to contend with internal and external challenges posed by the different stakeholders. Accordingly, governance can either be social-centric or state-centric depending on the governing practices put in place by the ruling class. In State-centric governance, the state is the leading player, and is thus responsible for defining governing objectives and making governance priorities. In such a case therefore, the state steers the society and the economy according to the objectives and priorities. Notably, governance is separate from management. In management, people involved follow rules but do not contribute much to policy formulation. In governance however, Dayton (2001) notes that the stakeholders are allowed to contribute to the entire governance process. This essay argues that governments, the private sector and the civil society need to play a more active role in setting up the right environment for governance for future development spurred by governance is to occur. Governance studies Governance has been a subject of interest to many scholars. The mere amount of literature that focuses on the subject is testimony to this assertion. Notably however, scholars have in the past studied political governance as well as corporate or economic governance. Going through the literature, one notes that there is no much difference regarding corporate and political governance. According to Stoker (2006), academic work on governance is a reflection of the shifting interest among social scientists, who acknowledge that governance is no longer a term that relates to governments as was the case in the past, but the term has expanded to cover the entire process of governing. Some of the functions identified by Stocker (2008) as viable in governance studies include systems that are able to handle external challenges, prevent conflict, and procure resources and frame goals and policies. Accordingly, Stocker (2006) argues that governance is concerned with generating conditions that brings about collective action and ordered rule. Dayton (2001) observes that governance is easily confused with management. According to him however, the two are distinct and should therefore be kept as such. UNDP (2006) captures the essence of governance by stating that it spans across governments, the private sector and the civil society. Human development and governance According to UNDP (2006) human development and governance are indivisible. This means that human development is unsustainable without proper governance. On the other hand, governance would have failed in its mandate if it fails to initiate and sustain human development. USAID has been championing the cause of good governance and democracy in developing nations for years now. In the process, the organisation has provided monetary assistance to governments in the hope that such grants would improve governance structures and hence democracy in the recipient countries. Billera and Black (2008) conducted a survey of USAID’s impact on governance and democracy and found out that the grants are more effective in meeting USAID’s objectives in the recipient countries when the socio-economic need in the recipient state is great, where the society is made of diverse groups, where the political environment is unstable, and where the USAID grants were consistent over a long period of time. Accordingly, the study by Billera & Black (2008) found out that governance can only meet the development objective in countries where the human rights are upheld and the rule of law entrenched in the governance structures. More so, the study revealed that good governance was possible where genuine political processes, which include competitive elections, were held. In addition, an active civil society was also necessary for the good governance. The study also revealed that transparency and accountability mechanism constituted good governance. Billera & Black (2008) argues that without sustainable democratic practices, attaining good governance is almost impossibility. A study by Wescott (2000) indicates that governance is not merely a bracket concept that the political class or the corporate leaders use on the governed. Rather, it is a series of programs that are enforced separately for the purpose of meeting specific objectives. The governance programs need specific conditions in order to be effective; they include: Programs should be based the reality on the ground rather than on pre-conceptions or blueprints The programs must be based on dialogue rather than pressure The programs should have a realistic sequence of implementation The designers of the programs should take into account the capacity challenges in the country The programs need to be flexible enough, thus giving the executing agencies the leeway to develop sub-projects when the need to do so arises. The study done by Stoker (2006) states that the governance concept recognizes that the capacity to get things working in a specific society rests with it, but unlike government, it does use authority or command on the people. Instead, it uses new techniques and tools to guide the people. In view of this assertion, adjectives such as “catalytic agent”; “enabler” or even “commissioner” can be used to define the role of governance. This means that governance offers leadership and builds partnerships with the non-governmental organisations as well as the civil society. In addition, governance promotes opportunities among the respective societies and also regulates the environment thus making it more viable for development projects. In the political environment, the government is relied upon to provide the way for proper governance. As such, Stocker (2006) identifies three tasks that governments should take up in order to improve on governance. They are (i) composition or decomposition and coordination; (ii) Steering and collaboration; and (iii) Regulation and integration. In view of these tasks, governance is expected to identify key stakeholders in the political system, the non-government organisations and the civil society to work with. In addition, governance has the responsibility of developing linkages to be used by the relevant parties (Beetham, 1992). In order to attain the desirable outcomes, governance has a responsibility of influencing and routing the relationships among the different stakeholders who participate in the governance process. According to Stocker (2006), system management is a concept that can be borrowed by governance from profit making organisations and imported to the system. This would then enable governance systems to thinks and act beyond individual sub-systems, avoid undesirable side effects and establish mechanisms that will enhance effective coordination within the governance structures. Notably, the government and the players therein have to possess the capacity and the will to adopt governing measures that improve governance and hence lay the ground work for development. In the absence of the political will, often the civil service and the private sector would have to intervene in order to press for responsible leadership from the political class. In developing countries especially in Africa and Asia, the civil society has for years been on the fore front pushing for governance reforms (Goran & Dele, 2000). According to Stocker (2006), governance can fail where governments fail to adopt the appropriate code of governance. When such happens, the government keeps reverting back to past hierarchical and bureaucratic tendencies, therefore impeding the free operations of the civil society or the private sector. Consequently, tensions and challenges arise in government relations to other stakeholders and this creates a rift in governance. Prospects for better modes of governance in future are informed by recent trends especially in the political circles that indicate that the citizenry have conceptualised their own ways of measuring governance. Wescott (2000), notes that some of the aspects that a citizen uses to measure government include the attainment of desired results, the economic situation and social aspects If good governance is practised, the citizenry would expect that their rights would be upheld, they would have a better social and economic environment and that the political class keeps their promises to the electorate. In the absence of such, Wescott (2000) further observes that the citizenry will always seek to vote in a new representative to leadership position in the hope that the new entrants would initiate desirable governance approaches. Decentralization and governance Decentralisation is touted by UNDP (2006) as the key element that would enable people to directly participate in governance processes. This in turn would include them in active decision making irrespective of their positions in the regional levels. Also known as devolution, this concept seeks at empowering people on communities by empowering them through opportunity creation. According to the UNDP report released in 2006, it is noted that devolution creates closer relations between local communities and government officials thus enabling the exchange of information. The information obtained from such relations can be used to develop programs that address the needs of the local population in a more satisfying manner (Hye, 2001). In a report by the World Bank (2001), it is noted that decentralization enhances governance by two ways: 1) through allocation efficiency whereby governments match services provided to the public to the local preferences; and 2) through productive efficiency whereby government officials are more accountable to the citizens. In addition, the government reduces bureaucracy levels in a devolved system and such a move brings a deeper understanding of the related local cost to government personnel as well as the citizenry. Some of the positive human development results observed in countries that have decentralised operations from high-ranking government positions to lower local levels include decreased levels of corruption and increased accountability by the government to the people (Fujuda-Parr & Ponzio, 2002; World Bank, 1993). Governance and the environment Issues of governance and environment may seem apart in theory, but they are much closer in reality. According to Welch & Nuru (2006), human development will not occur if issues of environment degradation witnessed in the world today are not addressed properly. As such, governance in the future must take issues of environmental sustainability much more seriously. More accurately, Huitric et al. (2009) suggests that the dynamics of ecological systems are well understood by environmentalists, but the same knowledge is not shared by the policy makers. Accordingly, good governance would encourage the environmentalists to share the knowledge with leaders in policy making positions in order to create viable environmental conditions necessary for future development (Riviera-Batiz, 1999). Measuring Governance In most developing countries, good governance is a concept introduced by international donors incorporating local stakeholders for purposes of fighting some of the challenges that prevent faster development (Wescott, 2000). The presence of international donors makes it imperative that governance is measured. More so, measuring governance also provide local stakeholders with the performance measures, which could be used to decide if the efforts are indeed bearing any results. Based on the results, the stakeholders are determine whether future governance initiatives need to carry on with the same pace or whether some corrective measures need to be taken. Wescott (2000) further states that governments mat need to measure governance in neighbouring countries for purposes of establishing just how much risk such neighbour pose in the region. As one would expect, measuring governance is not a straightforward exercise. Wescott(2008) observes that governance can be measured according to the effort that stake holders dedicate to the process, or how much results the governance initiatives give forth. Measuring governance through the efforts put therein is important because it give the stakeholders the necessary morale needed to pursue further initiatives. However, efforts should be combined with some signs of tangible progress in governance in order to have any meaning. Wescott (2006) further notes that such mode of governance measurement ensures there is fairness when resources from international funding agencies are being allocated. Measuring governance by results attained is necessary for comparative reasons. Notably, even the slightest steps towards good governance in countries where it did not exist previously are a sign of progress. In measuring performance, the variables can either be qualitative or quantitative. These variables are usually proxies. Qualitative variables used in governance measurement usually gauge peoples perception of governance practices. Kaufman et al. (1999) classify the governance measurement indicators into six categories; they include: “Voice and accountability; political instability and violence; government effectiveness; regulatory burden; rule of law; and graft” (p. 11). Justifying their choice of indicators, Kaufman et al. (1999) argue that each of the picked pointers had a strong affirmative association with governance indicators in developing countries. The development indicators are identified as per-capita incomes, adult literacy and infant mortality. Although the authors’ choice of development indicators is narrow and mainly targeted at poor countries which register high illiteracy levels, high infant mortality and low incomes, the measurements seem plausible enough. Notably however, successful governance is affected by several factors including the socio-political history of a country, the amount of time that stakeholders have been trying to implement good governance and the amount of resources that the country has. Kaufman et al. (1999) observes that good governance is more prevalent in wealthier countries than poor countries. In view of globalisation becoming a practical phenomenon rather than just a theory, UNDP (2006) notes that international organisations that are helping countries adopt governance measures that will encourage development in such a way that geographical borders will no longer be recognizable are dealing with a very sensitive and challenging issue. Governments at a centric position in issues of governance; this means that states have to find a balance between globalisation and the provision of stable and secure social-economic domestic environment. Building capacity for governance The most basic tenet of governance as identified by UNDP (2006) is the presence of governing institutions. These include legislatures, electoral bodies and judiciaries. The role of the legislature is to establish policies that take into account the different interest presented in the state. The judiciary on the other hand ensures that the rule of law is upheld, while electoral bodies ensure that there are transparent and independent elections (UNDP, 2006). Some characteristic which would lay the ground work for good governance include participation of all stakeholders in decision making. According to the UNDP (2006), the participation can either be direct or through intermediate channels that represent the stakeholder’s interests. The rule of law is also another characteristic that is vital in governance because it ensures that the legal frameworks enforced are fair and impartial. The next characteristic necessary for governance as identified by UNDP (2006) is transparency. Accordingly, transparency allows the uninhibited flow of information, which in turn makes process and institutions directly accessible thus making monitoring the governance structures easier. Good governance according to Kaufman et al. (1999) further ensures that there is consensus orientation. This enables governance to mediate nay differing interests within the stakeholders, and as a result policies and procedures which are at the best interest of the interest groups and the larger society are upheld. Equity, effectiveness and efficiency, accountability, and strategic vision are also characteristics identified by UNDP as necessary in governance. Promoting development for the future The three governance domains have unique roles in promoting human development for the future. In the contemporary world where countries are trying to ape democracies, most countries elect their leaders through established electoral commissions. Most developing countries also have vibrant civil societies and the private sector, which mainly concentrates on trade and economics. Having identified the state, the civil society and private sector as the main players in governance, just what are their specific roles in the process, and especially in human development? The state In democracies, or merging democracies, the electoral process is responsible for ensuring that a government comprising of an executive and a legislature is in office. The two arms of government (in most cases the executive) are then mandated to appoint the judiciary. Upon taking office, the three arms of government (executive, legislature and judiciary), have a responsibility to their electorate to provide public services and create an enabling environment that would in turn spur human development. Often, this requires the government to establish and maintain a fair and effective regulating framework that would ensure that the bigger society enjoys a stable and equity in the society. The government also takes on a mediating role which serves the public good. In addition, the government needs to provide effective public services to the citizenry of a country. One of the challenges faced by governments as identified by UNDP (2006) is addressing the needs and concerns of the poor in every society. Notably, development in most countries has succeeded in creating a class of super-rich individuals and a vibrant middle class. However, there are still a class of people who despite development in their societies lack the proper “stepping stones” necessary to move them from poverty. They lack basic provisions such as proper housing, education, jobs and even food. When such is the case, good governance requires that respective governments to increase opportunities for the poor, in order to assist them seek, attain and sustain income generating activities that will eventually improve their livelihoods. Notably, the bulk of governance roles lay with government. Some of government’s role include: ensuring the poor and vulnerable groups in the society are protected, providing stable macro-economic environments, providing security, providing public health, providing public infrastructure and services, maintaining social harmony, security and social order among others. According to the UNDP (2006), states face pressures to reorient and reconfigure social and economic activities from three quotas: The private sector, which wants a balance between the market and the state; the citizens, who press their respective governments for greater decentralisation, responsiveness and accountability; and from global sources such as international organisation or trading partner states, who introduce new economic and social trends thus challenging the nature and identity of a specific state. The private sector Human development for the future depends partially on the private sector’s ability to create jobs for people in different societies. UNDP (2006) argues that the private sector’s pivotal role in governance stems from the fact that job creation provides the society with money-making avenues, which in turn improve the living standards of people in specific societies. Unlike government, which has limited employment opportunities for the people, the private sector keeps on expanding thus providing more opportunities to the job market. The private sector however needs government support in order to prosper. The government further needs to encourage transparency and competition in the market place by putting the right regulation practices in place. Some of the responsibilities that the private sector needs to uphold in order to ensure equitable human development are gender balance, equitable growth and preservation of the environment among others. For this to happen, the private sector needs to operate in a stable macro-environment (Welch & Nuru, 2006). According to the UNDP governance report released in 2006, governments should assist in private enterprise development through laying the infrastructure for competitive markets, ensuring that business can easily access credit, nurturing enterprises that have the capacity to create more job opportunities in the respective countries. The government also needs to encourage the growth of the private sector by encouraging more foreign direct investments to the country. According to Welch & Nuru (2006), FDIs not only create more job opportunities, but also helps in transferring technology and knowledge to the domestic market. The civil society UNDP (2006) defines the civil society as the “political face of the society” (p. 19). The civil society’s role is protecting the rights if citizens amidst unresponsive government action and the changing private sector. Accordingly, the civil society connects individual citizens with the state and the public realm. In different communities, the civil society organise the citizenry into powerful groups, which in turn influence policy making. The civil society is also responsible for monitoring social abuses, as well as providing checks and balances to the government. Accountability is a prerequisite of good governance. Seeing that governments can rarely hold themselves accountable, it therefore becomes the responsibility of the civil society to ensure that appointed or elected official charged with public mandate are accountable for their decisions, actions or activities. Apart from ensuring that elected or appointed officials are answerable, the civil society also need to know the contracts, legislations, rules and legalistic standings necessary to check people holding public office. Legitimacy For power to be legitimate, the governed must see that it conforms to established rules. The rules on the other hand are justified when they adhere to shared beliefs in a society (Beetham 1991). This is to mean that power can only be exercise with the consent of the governed. In governance, the different players need to cooperate and sustain relationships in order to possess decision-making power that passes the legitimacy test (Ewalt, 2001). This means that cooperation between the government, the private sector and the civil society is key factor in successful governance. For collective action to occur, organisations in governance must be willing to work together, exchange resources and negotiate common goals depending on their different understanding of a situation (Ewalt, 2001). This view is shared by Stocker (1998) who observes that governance draws its strengths from the relationships established between organisations. Accordingly, the collective action breeds power dependence, which implies that organisations dedicated to collective action must be willing to work with others. More so, goal attainment depends to a particular extent on the exchange or resources between relating organisations or the negotiations that take place among all participating organisations. Stocker (1998) further argue that in order to governance to have desirable outcomes, rules of governance have to be set and there has to be a clear context for basing information or resources exchange have to be clear. This argument suggests that a government relationship is not based on commands; rather, one organisation can dominate the process thus requiring the other participants to oblige to the set directives. Usually, governments are the domineering party in organisations. However, for successful governance to occur, Stocker (1998) notes that the government needs to forge an interactive environment that allows participants in the governing process to share knowledge, pool resources and tackle problems collectively rather than unilaterally. This opinion is shared by Kooiman (1993) who observes that neither the government nor the private stakeholder in the private sector or the civil service have the capacity to handle governance problems alone. It is worth noting that the positive inter-dependence between governments, the civil society and the private sector is especially crucial for development in emerging democracies. Stocker (1998) for example notes that economic and social issues confronting developing nations need the input of respective governments, the voluntary sectors as well as the civil society. The partnerships formed in governance can take different form. Broadbent et al. (1996) identifies one of the viable partnerships as principal-agent relationship. Here, one party (mainly the government) acts as the principal and contracts the other to perform specific tasks. In the contemporary society, this form of partnership is mainly observed as governments ‘outsource’ service provision to the private sector through competitive binding contracting. According to Jessop (1996) this form of partnership allows governments to build capacity and is hence able to meet the objectives of governance more aptly. Systemic partnership further establishes mutual understanding and as sense of belonging, which allows the three parties in governance to establish a shared vision, joint capacity for work and a self-governing strategy (Stoker, 1998). Systemic coordination in governance according to Stoker (1998) allows partnerships to abide by the rules, which are intentionally designed for purposes of establishing structured governance orders. In the principal-agent partnership relationship, the principal gives the agent a freehand to run the affairs of the contracted services. However, during the negotiating stage, the two parties need to negotiate the desirable outcomes in order to ensure that the best possible outcomes are provided to the society. Some of the shortcomings that happen in this form of relationship occur when the principle fails to vet the agent (private sector service provider) as required. When this happens, the agent may end up providing the principal with sub-standard services. This trend has been observed in developing countries where private contractors fail to meet the expected service provision standards, usually leading to the loss of taxpayer money to fraudulent contractors (Welch & Nuru, 2006). Stoker (1998) observes that opportunistic behaviour is a major challenge that governance has to overcome in future if successful human development is to be realised from the same. When opportunistic behaviour becomes a factor in principal-agent relationships, then outcomes from such partnerships are much more complex and uncertain. Hirschman (1991) however argues that governance should have a greater risk to cope with such risks by enacting the right policies that will minimise the chance of opportunism. Self-governing actors In governance, networks are formed for purposes of influencing government policies as well as taking businesses that were previously the responsibility of governments. According to Stocker (1995) however, institutions and actors in governance blend skills, resources and purposes into long-term coalitions. Accordingly, they may form a regime, which then pre-empts leadership roles in the respective communities. Stoker (19980 argues that the establishment of a regime that is able to establish itself as a likely decision-making monopoly is the ultimate source of power for emerging governance systems. However, the formation of regimes in governance has it fair share of challenges. According to Stocker (1998), establishing the means for collective action especially where socially inclusive or radical changes need to be implemented can be quite problematic. Trends for the future It is notable that though many countries are adopting governance, more needs to be done if good governance is to be attained especially in the developing countries. World Bank Institute et al. (2009) for example notes that the state-society relations need to be improved in order to create the necessary environment for development. Building on the capacity of the civil society is especially important, because often times they lack the capacity needed to hold the government accountable. Some of the possible solutions offered by World Bank Institute et al. (2009) in regarding to solving the capacity challenge in civil society organisations is the fostering of better state-civil society interactions. More to this, other institutions in the society such as professional bodies and university student bodies can also take the role of holding governments accountable. In the long-term, such actions will enhance good governance by enhancing the relations between the state and the larger society. In countries where the civil society is yet to gain the democratic space to hold the government accountable or lobby for better performance from the government, World Bank Institute et al. (2009) suggests that the necessary institutional and legal frameworks should be set up in order to encourage civil society-state engagements. Gauging by the autocratic nature of some governments, this would be an uphill task for many civil society. As such, using democratic pressure, global partners and international lobby groups could enable the civil society petition for a viable enabling environment (Corbin, 2002). This however comes with a new set of challenges. Notably, autocratic governments abhor external intervention and when such occurs, it could risk worsening relations between the civil society groups and the government. To avoid such situations, World Bank Institute et al. (2009) suggests that donors and international partners should aim at creating an enabling environment where civil society groups and governments can interact and exchange governance ideas, rather than imposing sanctions or withdrawing funding. Conclusion It is rather obvious that good governance is essential for sustainable development in the future. As such, sound social, environmental and economic policies based on democratic institutions have to be formulated in order to respond to the needs presented by the society. As established in this essay, the cooperation between governments, the private sector and the civil society is necessary for sustainable social and economic growth to occur. The partnerships created in governance are also essential for employment creation and poverty eradication. Since democratisation of countries is a centric factor in governance, it is also likely that peace, security, freedom, gender equality and equity may be attained by a majority of people in the world. The rule of law will most likely become common place and the encouragement of foreign direct investments by different countries will help to strengthen the economic prosperity of most countries. With the world becoming a global place, multilateral trading systems will most likely reinforce development in developing nations. Overall, there is no denying that the relationship between governance and development for the future is unbreakable. Without proper governance, societies will have no way to express themselves to the ruling class thus meaning that policies made will not reflect the needs and priorities of the masses. It is the combination of governments, a vibrant civil society and a private sector that makes governance a reality. To accommodate challenges that will keep cropping up in the future, presents regimes need to keep reinventing conditions that can lead to better governance and hence more development prospects in future. References Abdellatif, A. M. (2003). Good governance and its relationship to democracy and economic development. Ministry of Justice Republic of Korea. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from http://www.pogar.org/publications/governance/aa/goodgov.pdf Beetham, D. (1991). Legitimation. London: Macmillan. Beetham, D. (1992). Liberal Democracy and the limits of democratization. Political Studies Special Issue 40(1), 40-44. Billera, M. & Black, D. (2008). New Study finds USAID democracy and governance assistance works.USAID: from the American People. Retrieved March 30, 2010 from: http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/democracy_and_governance/publications/pdfs/SORA_pitt_vandy4pager_FINAL.pdf Broadbent, J., Dietrich, M. & Laughlin, R. (1996). The development of principal-agent, contracting and accountability relationships in the public sector: conceptual and cultural problem. Critical perspectives in accounting 17, 259-284. Corbin, C. (2002). Governance, dependency and future political development in the non-independent Caribbean. Presentation at the 4th annual SALISES conference, West Indies. Ewalt, J.A.G. (2001). Theories of governance and new public management: Links to understanding welfare policy implementation. Annual conference of the American society for public administration 1-24. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/ASPA/UNPAN000563.pdf Fujuda-Parr, S. & Ponzio, R. (2002). Governance: Past, present, future setting the governance agenda for the millennium declaration. Background paper on the HDR Goran, H. & Dele, O. (2000). African perspective on Governance. Johannesburg: Africa World Press Hirschman, A. (1991). The rhetoric of reaction. Cambridge: Harvard University press. Hirst, P. (2000). “Democracy and governance” in Pierre, J. (ed), Debating Governance: Authority, Steering and Democracy. Oxford :Oxford University Press. Huitric, M., Walker, B. & Moberg, F. Et al (2009). Biodiversity, Ecosystem services and resilience. Governance for a future with global challenges. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from: http://www.se2009.eu/polopoly_fs/1.12832!menu/standard/file/Biodiversity,%20Ecosystem%20Services%20and%20Resilience.pdf Hye,H. A. (2001). Governance: South Asian Perspective. London: Oxford University Press. Jessop, B. (1996). Partnership in Greater Manchester and the Thames Gateway. Paper for DoE seminar. Kaufman, D., Kraay, A. & Zoido-Lobaton, P. (1999). Governance Matters. Policy Research Working Paper 2196. 1-64. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/pdf/govmatters1.pdf Kooiman, J. (1993). Social-Political governance: Introduction in J. Kooiman (ed.). Modern Governance. London: SAGE. Pierre, J. (2000). Debating Governance: Authority, Steering and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Riviera-Batiz F.L. (1999). Democracy, Governance and Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence. Paper presented at conference on democracy, participation and development, New York. Stocker, G. (1995). Regime theory and urban politics. In Judge et al. Theories of Urban Politics. London: SAGE. Stocker, G. (1998). Governance as Theory: Five Propositions. UNESCO 17-26. UN (2006). Definition of basic concepts and terminologies in Governance. Economic and Social Council E/C.16/2006/4 1-14. UNDP. (2007). Governance for Sustainable Human Development: A UNDP Policy Document. UNDP governance policy paper 1-64. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from: http://www.pogar.org/publications/other/undp/governance/undppolicydoc97-e.pdf Welch,G. & Nuru, Z. (2006). Governance for the Future: Democracy and Development in the Least Developed Countries. United Nations Development Program. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from http://www.unohrlls.org/UserFiles/File/Publications/Governancereport.pdf Wescott, C. (2000). Measuring Governance in Developing Asia. The Seminar on International Experiences on Good Governance and Fighting Corruption. Retrieved March 31, 2010 from: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN002752.pdf World Bank. (1993). Governance. World Bank Publications: Washington DC. Read More