towards good governance a south asian perspective

Nepalese Journal of Public Policy and Governance, Vol. xxv, No.2, December, 2009 1

Towards Good Governance: A South Asian Perspective

RB Jain

Abstract

South Asia has long been a neglected area of study, primarily because it has

been a region of great deprivation, want and misery, seemingly far from the

mainstream of international activity except occasionally in the news as a

theatre of politics in the Cold War era. It is also known as one of the most

misgoverned areas of the world. Indeed, as a well known Bangladeshi scholar Rehman

Sobhan has said: "South Asia is united by a common thread of

'misgovernance'. In recent years, however, the wave of democratization has

swept away some of the military/authoritarian and traditional polities in

the region, This change together with the endemic ethnic conflicts and

violence which have dogged practically every country of the region and the emergence of

India as a country moving towards a rapid economic and industrial growth

amongst other countries of South Asia have aroused the interest of scholars in this

region.

After discussing the various interpretation of the concept of "Good

Governance", the paper aims to discuss some of the important challenges

faced by the South Asian countries in revamping their administrative systems

in order to discern the emerging perspective of "good governance" in South

Asia, as distinct from its Western concept.

1. Introduction

In the last five decades of the twentieth

century, a large number of nations have

emerged as independent sovereign states

out of the clutches of the colonial rule.

The successor governments not only had

the responsibility of establishing identity

and legitimacy as unified and

independent nation- states, but also to

create a new system of policy and

decision-making and implementation for

socio-economic development leading to

corrections of inequalities and injustices

existing in the societies either because

of caste, ethnic, racial, sex, religious, or

land tenure discriminations. Public

Administration has become the critical

factor for success in achieving these

objectives. Within the realm of public

administration, bureaucracy has

emerged as the most important

instrument to plan, perform and deliver

public goods. Such a role of bureaucracy

is simply not going to whither away

despite the worldwide impact of the

modernists and the proponents of the

New Public Management to contract the

role of state and consequently of the

public bureaucracy in securing good

governance in these so called nations of

the Third World.

2 Towards good governance: A South Asian perspective

During these fifty years, many Third

World countries experienced societal

transformation and profound changes in

their socio-economic and political

domains through identity, management

and refinement. While earlier there was

a tendency on the part of the

bureaucracy to alienate from the large

sections of the population in the society,

later however, the bureaucracy had to

work with the people to be able to tackle

their complex developmental problems.

In some cases bureaucracy has proved a

tower of strength to the governments

and the processes of governance; in

some others it proved an obstacle

because of strange paradoxes. Most

developmental policies in these

countries have eventually come to be

translated into action through

bureaucracy at all levels of their

formulation, implementation and

evaluation.

Bureaucracy and Development has thus

emerged as a very vast field of study in

the discipline of public administration

having multiple dimensions. These have

extended to study and research in such

diverse, but inter-related subjects as

Legacy of Regime Transformation

Functions of bureaucracy; regulatory and

non-regulatory

Socio-economic background

Attitudinal characteristics

Politics-administration relationship and

Emergence of bureaucracy as an instrument

of political power, and

Efforts towards securing “Good

Governance”

Each of these dimensions have received

a fair share of its understanding and

interpretation of the realities and

formulation of new paradigms for

further study and research not only in

individual national settings but also,

though sporadically, in cross-national

contexts too.

Good Governance: An Evolving

Concept

In its evolutionary process, the sub-

discipline of bureaucracy, development

and administration has in the late 1980s

transcended from its limited theme of all

that was associated with the concept of

“development administration” to that of

the broader framework of “governance”

and later in 1990s to the philosophy and

actions inherent in the concept of “good

governance”. The notion of good

governance seems to have first appeared

in a 1989 World Bank Report on Africa,

which defines as the " …exercise of

political power to manage a nations'

affairs… Good governance included

some or all of the following features: an

efficient public service; an independent

judicial system and legal framework to

enforce contracts; the accountable

administration of public funds; an

independent public auditor, responsible

to a representative legislature; respect

for the law and human rights at all levels

of government; a pluralistic institutional

structure, and a free press" (World

Bank, 1989 quoted in Adrian Leftwich,

1993). The World Bank reconfirmed its

initial managerial approach by its 1992

statement in Governance and

Development, which treats good

governance as 'synonymous with sound

development management "(World

Bank, 1992, p1).

In the later years in the last decade of

the twentieth century a number of

pronouncements on governance,


democracy and development followed,

which sought to establish their inter-

relationships and inter-dependence.

These were supported not only by all

major Western democracies like the

British, French, German, US and Nordic

countries, but also by the main

international development institutions,

and a variety of cooperative,

intergovernmental and regional

organizations, such as the Organization

for Economic Cooperation and

Development (OECD), the Organization

for African Unity (OAU), the European

Communities and the Commonwealth,

as also by almost all aid-giving

agencies. Incidentally, India is perhaps

the sole example of a Third World

country, maintaining and emphasizing

this relationship in its policies on

development long before this became

currency amongst the Western countries

and their sponsored institutions or

agencies.

However, all these agencies and

organizations did not have identical

views or interpretation of the

relationship between governance,

democracy and development. While

some were emphatic on the democracy,

others stressed on administration, or

administrative development for

achieving the goals of development

administration, and yet others laid the

condition of human rights as either

necessary or desirable components of

development. However, despite these

differences in approach, a common

underlying assumption of good

governance has been thought of

consisting of three main components, or

levels, ranging from the most to the least

inclusive: systemic, political and

administrative (Leftwich, 1993, p1).

From the systemic point of view, the

concept of governance signifies more

than its institutional or decision-making

interpretation to include both internal

and external political and economic

power and the inter-relationship

between the two to indicate the rules by

which the productive and distributive

life of a society is governed. From the

political point of view, good governance

implies a state enjoying both legitimacy

and authority derived from a democratic

mandate and would normally involve a

pluralist polity with representative

government and a commitment to

protect human rights. From the narrow

perspective of administration, good

governance means an efficient, open,

accountable and audited public service

which has the bureaucratic competence

to help design and implement

appropriate public policies and at the

same time an independent judicial

system to uphold the law (Leftwich,

1993).

However, with the advent of

liberalization and global market

economy since the 1980s the above

interpretation of good governance had

undergone further modification to mean

a democratic capitalist regime, presided

over by a minimal state which is also the

part of the wider governance of the New

World Order. Translated into

administrative terms it would be

interpreted to mean not only a

diminishing role of the bureaucracy, but

a continuous process of de-

bureaucratization and a competition

(and cooperation) between the private

and public sector, with increasing role


and participation by non-state voluntary

sector the so called NGOs in the process

of society's development (Jain, 1995).

The role of civil society in activating

and perseverance of “Good

Governance” is now being perceived by

scholars to be very crucial and has

received a great momentum in the last

one decade.

Democracy, Development and

Good Governance

There has been a considerable debate

and argument in the context of Third

World countries whether democracy

should precede development or the other

way round. There had been a very

strong argument amongst the scholars

and policy makers in many developing

countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin

America (with only rare exceptions) that

the 'premature' introduction of

democracy may actually hamper

development in its early stages when

there is a crucial choice between rapid

development and democratic processes,

and when there is the greatest need for

effective state action or direction. It was

felt that since the early stages of

development require capital

accumulation for infrastructure and

investment before advanced welfare

systems can be adopted. An argument

was convincingly made out that

democratic systems were likely to

curtail processes of accumulation in

favor of consumption. However some

critics argued that democracy and

development are both compatible and

functional for each other. If there was a

trade-off between development and

democracy, they claim a slightly lower

rate of growth is an acceptable price to

pay for a democratic polity, civil

liberties and a good human rights record

(Leftwich, 1993, p1).

The empirical literature on the subject

suggests that there is no necessary

relationship between democracy and

development nor, more generally,

between any regime type and economic

performance. It is a more complex

relationship which starts from the hard

fact that both democratic and non-

democratic Third World regimes have

been able to generate high levels of

economic development. From Costa

Rica to China and from Botswana to

Thailand, the state has played an active

role in influencing economic behavior

and has often had a significant material

stake in the economy itself. Thus it is

not the regime type but the kind and

character of the state and its associated

politics that have been decisive in

influencing developmental performance.

This in turn highlights the primacy of

politics, not simply governance as a

central determinant of development

(Leftwich, p432).

A further argument can be made that

apart from the primacy of politics in the

process of governance, cultural values,

norms, customs and ideological

orientations of the Third World

countries have direct relevance for good

governance, which have to be

systematically identified and applied,

while administrative norms and values

borrowed from another culture have to

be modified to suit the local values and

cultural systems. Democratic politics

has sometimes been viewed as a

struggle between politics and

bureaucracy, which is not necessarily so.


The collusion between the two actors is

implicit in the corporatist interpretations

of modern politics. Third World

countries have provided an equally

receptive environment for the

development of bureaucratic power even

beyond the 'over developed' conditions

in which it was bequeathed by the

colonial powers to the newly

independent state.

The growing involvement of state in the

direct management of economy in

society, the absence of alternative

centers of expertise, the colonial

hangover of bureaucratic dominance and

the frequent fusion of party and state in

single party systems have given rise to

familiar concerns about the capacity of

non-bureaucratic political institutions to

fulfill the requirements of political

democracy. All these concerns have led

to a most crucial dilemma for societies

during the decades of 1960s and 1970s:

whether the bureaucratic organization

has any advantage despite the costs of

maintaining it in terms of its own

dysfunctional potential and the political

vigilance required; and the concomitant

search for de-bureaucratization and

alternatives to the administrative state

(Asmerom and Jain, 1993)? This

dilemma seems to have resolved in the

late 1980s in favor of accepting

bureaucracy as an important tool of

governance, but not the predominant

force in the process of good governance.

From a developmental viewpoint, the

general but simplistic appeal for better

'governance' as a condition of

development is virtuous but naïve, since

a competent administration is not simply

a product of 'institution building' or

improved training, but of politics. And if

the politics do not give rise to the kind

of state which can generate, sustain and

protect an effective and independent

capacity for governance, then there will

be no positive developmental

consequences (Leftwich, 1993, p436).

South Asia: A Region United by

Poor Governance

South Asia as a region includes eight

nations along with 7 SAARC states

(India, Pakistan. Nepal, Sri Lanka,

Bhutan, Bangladesh, Maldives, and

Afghanistan). It comprises roughly 1.5

billion people that are nearly one fourth

of the global population. It is more than

3 times the total population of EU (25

states) living in half of China’s land

area. Here is the largest concentration of

the worlds poor numbering 500 million,

or South Asia’s one third. There are

contrasting estimates of income also.

South Asia’s 5% enjoy high middle

class living which, as per purchasing

power parity, vie with the EU average.

However, income inequality is not the

main problem of South Asia. It is only

one symptom of the greatest disease of

extreme poverty that this region has

been suffering from since the late

nineteen forties when the British

colonial rule was formally over (Masud

and Shamsul, 2004).

South Asia has long been a neglected

area of study, primarily because it has

been a region of great deprivation, want

and misery, seemingly far from the

mainstream of international activity

except occasionally in the news as a

theatre of politics in the cold war era. It

is also known as one of the most

misgoverned areas of the world. Indeed,


as the Bangladeshi scholar Sobhan

Rehman has said: “South Asia is united

by a common thread of ‘mis-

governance" (Rehman, 2000). In recent

years, however, the wave of

democratization has swept away some

of the military/authoritarian and

traditional polities in the region. This

change together with the endemic ethnic

conflicts and violence which have

dogged practically every country of the

region and the competition for nuclear

supremacy between the two largest

countries of South Asia have aroused

the interest of scholars in this region.,

and institutions like Word Bank have

pleaded for governance reforms in all

the countries of this region.

The states of South Asia, however, are

at different levels of political

development. While India and Sri Lanka

are seasoned democracies, Bangladesh

has had democracy interrupted by

periods of military rule. Pakistan has

faced military rule for long periods and

has only recently emerged from military

rule to a republican democracy. “A new

pattern of military involvement in

politics, which one scholar calls “power

without accountability” is emerging

both in Pakistan and Bangladesh, a trend

that bodes ill for their infant and fragile

democracies (Ghosal, 2008). Nepal’s

short-lived democracy beginning in the

early years of the decade of nineteen

fifties as Constitutional Monarchy was

interrupted by monarchical intervention

with the help of the army, and having

suffered great political turmoil and

instability in the last few years is now

ultimately experiencing a nascent

democratic Republic having finally

abolished the monarchical system.

Bhutan until recently largely controlled

by the King is gradually incorporating

certain elements of a constitutional

democratic system in its governance.

Maldives Island has just shifted itself

from an absolute rule to a popularly

elected democratic system. Afghanistan

after recovering from the rule of Taliban

is gradually trying to strengthen its

fragile democratic republican system

against the frequent onslaughts of the

Taliban and militants, who are still

active in certain parts of Afghanistan. In

addition, however a new factor which

seems to be emerging as common

characteristic of all South Asian

countries is the phenomenon of growing

militancy and terrorism, which is

currently dodging all nations in the

region, and has made a crucial dent in

their capacity of governance.

Political and Party systems in South

Asia have not followed any uniform

pattern of evolution or development.

Despite the fact that except for Nepal,

other countries in South Asia viz. India,

Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Bangladesh

have shared long common historical

traditions and colonial legacies, each of

the country in the region has adopted its

own political system without any

common political or party features

mostly present in most Western polities.

The political parties and their nature,

role and ideology also vary amongst the

nations of South Asia. All of South

Asian governments have, however, not

been able to ensure large number of

communities of their rights. South Asian

societies face similar problems of high-

handedness by governments, especially,

concerning ethnic and religious

minorities along with the excluded and


poor populations. Political and

administrative corruption is another

prominent characteristic of all the South

Asian governments, which prevent these

nations to utilize their maximum

capacity to develop.

Good Governance: A South Asian

Perspective

As argued by O. P. Dwivedi, “Good” is

a value-laden term which involves a

comparison between two things or

systems by using some standard of

measure. A government or a system of

governance is considered good if it

exhibits certain fundamental

characteristics suggested by the United

Nations Development Program (UNDP),

which offers the most comprehensive

definition and an idealistic model of

good governance: Good governance is,

among other things, participatory,

transparent, and accountable governance

system (Dwivedi qouted in Jain, 2007,

p170). It is also effective and equitable.

And it promotes the rule of law. Good

governance ensures that political, social

and economic priorities are based on

broad consensus in society and that the

voices of the poorest and the vulnerable

are heard in decision-making over the

allocation of development resources

(ibid, p107). From the above, the

following characteristics of good

governance can be suggested: (a) public

participation (b) rule of law (c)

transparency; (d) responsiveness (e)

consensus among different and differing

interests (f) equity assured to all

individuals (g) effective, efficient,

responsible and accountable public

institutions and the statecraft. (h)

strategic vision of the leaders towards

broad range long-term perspectives on

sustainable human development; (i)

stewardship of governance where

governing elites dedicate their lives for

service to the public, and where

amoralism does not reign supreme.

Good governance and sustainable

human development, especially for

developing nations, also requires

conscientious attempts at eliminating

poverty, sustaining livelihoods, fulfilling

basic needs, and offering an

administrative system, which is clean

and open. It is important that these

characteristics are not only enshrined in

a constitutional document but also are

practiced (Dwivedi, 1987).

Based on the above, Dwivedi suggests

following FOUR models of Good

Governance:

1) the Public Service Model of Good

Government,

2) Judicial Model,

3) the New Public Management Model of

Good Governance, and

4) the Deontological or Spiritual Model of

Good Government.

These models, individually, do not

represent a comprehensive and an

accurate description of bringing better

governance; rather they provide a useful

means to consider various options for

further analysis. The first three models

seem to emphasize on the end results.

However, as ends and means both are

the two sides of the same coin, and a

solid interconnection between the two

ensures the preservation of good

administration, while the fourth, a

morality-driven model strengthens those

broad principles that ought to govern

our governmental conduct, because they


mark the direction towards which those

who govern must channel their acts if

they are to serve humanity. Spirituality,

deriving from such foundations thus

provides an important base to the

governing process. Confidence and trust

in liberal-democracy can be safeguarded

only when the governing process

exhibits a higher moral tone, deriving

from the breadth of ethical and spiritual

sensitivity (ibid).

In the light of foregoing analysis, a

number of questions arise; Are the

West-originated theory and practice of

governance—it basic concepts,

assumptions and values—relevant for

the South Asian nations? Should not

consideration be given to various

indigenously developed alternatives

more suited to tackle the satisfaction of

people’s basic needs, the eradication of

poverty and the protection of human

dignity? Is not the current crisis of

governance faced by the South Asian

nations precisely a consequence of the

inability of the West to incorporate the

substance of the West to incorporate the

substance of other non-Western

developmental experiences into the

prevailing conceptual mould (Dwivdi,

1987)?

Thus before another paradigm of good

governance emerges in the West (along

with the notion that any problem can be

solved by providing a detailed blueprint,

promising a little foreign aid, and

insisting on changing the existing

political equation on the part of a

recipient nation), has not the time come

to focus on results instead of keep on

creating grand visions because such

grand visions keep on multiplying as

each international institution tries to

broaden its idealism and scope of

activities in the field of human

development (Einhorn, 2001, p13)?

Here I am in complete agreement with

Professor Dwivedi’s view “that the new

century demands a new thinking to face

the greatest dilemma before the

humanity: how come a small group of

nations keep on “progressing” while the

majority remains poor and deprived!

Before one contemplates to install good

governance (exported from the West),

let the most basic and fundamental

requisite is taken care of by a concerted

efforts of the rich nations and the leaders

of the South Asian nations: how to

stamp out starvation, destitution,

inequality, oppression and terrorism”

(Einhorn, 2001) The framework

suggested above, if applied with care

and local support might help to usher in

an era of ‘good governance'.

In the light of the above discussion, let

us now ponder over the kind of

framework of good governance that may

be considered appropriate for South

Asian nations. A World Bank Report on

Governance in South Asia has

recommended a number of measures for

the global community to help establish

good governance in South Asia. These

are:

(httm://www.eias.org/publications/briefi

ng/1999/weakdev.pdf.pdf):

1. Increase the level of surveillance on

South Asian states on the issues of

governance through human intelligence

network, research cooperation and

interaction with civil society think

tanks, academics and scholars.

2. Initiate to become active policy


dialogue partners of South Asian

governments, NGOs, local government

institutions, press and political parties.

3. Reforms rather than projects should be

the development priority for South

Asia.

4. Donors need adopt people-centric,

empowerment approach to development

and remain aware of the deception and

diversion tactics of governments.

5. Trade, aid, transaction and immigration-

all should be tied to compliance

requirement.

6. Research to be intensified that is

primarily based on local knowledge.

Apart from the above measures for

consideration and guidance of

international community or that and/or

the donor nations and institutions, it is

essential that the strategies suggested

below should be kept in mind by the

leaders and policy makers of the South

Asian nations in order to develop a

perspective of “good governance”,

appropriate to their individual countries.

Strategies towards Good

Governance in South Asia

In the perspective of these developments

around the world and in India, the

fundamental question that arises is to

devise the strategies that would be

conducive for the developing nations,

particularly India, to strive towards

sustainable development. Besides the

institutional and structural innovations

that make for a system of good

governance, a corruption free

sustainable development requires a

“moral determination” (ibid).

Recognition of that moral determination

in governance marks the direction in

which those who govern must channel

their efforts toward the common good if

they are to justly serve the society. That

direction calls for individual moral

responsibility and accountability,

sacrifice, compassion, justice and an

honest effort to achieve the common

good. Ultimately, it is the moral

determination which provides the

foundation for good governance.

(i) Adopting a Normative Model of

Good Governance

Thus the need of the hour at present

seems to be to adopt a normative model

of Good Management Approach

incorporating both the politico-

administrative as well as the moral

dimensions of good governance. This

should, include (a) A more strategic or

result-oriented (efficiency, effectiveness

and service quality ) orientation to

decision-making (b) Replacement of

highly centralized organizational

structures with decentralized

management environment integrating

with the new Rural, Urban and

Municipal Institutions, where decisions

on resource allocation and service

delivery are taken close to the point of

delivery. (c) Flexibility to explore

alternatives to direct public provision

which might provide more cost effective

policy outcomes (d) Focusing attention

on the matching of authority and

responsibility as a key to improving

performance, including mechanism of

explicit performance contracting (e)

Creating of competitive environments

within and between public service

organizations. (f) Strengthening of

strategic capacities at the Center to steer

government to respond to external

changes and diverse interests quickly,

flexibly and at least costs (g) Greater

accountability and transparency through

requirements to report on results and


their full costs (h) Service wide

budgeting and management systems to

support and encourage these changes

and (i) The most important task to break

the growing nexus of bureaucrats,

politicians and criminals leading not

only to a breakdown of the total system

but also to a sense of cynicism amongst

the citizenry (j) Adapting of innovations

and evolving suitable mechanism to

eliminate corruption at both political and

administrative levels and strengthen

citizens’ grievance redressal system (k)

Improving the system of delivery at the

cutting edge of administration by

replacing the existing archaic

bureaucratic procedures by absorbing

some appropriate precepts inherent in

the philosophy of New Public

Management and (l) Making

improvements in the working

atmosphere of the government

institutions and offices to reflect a new

work culture and a changed

administrative behavior incorporating

the principles of transparency,

responsiveness, accountability,

participative and citizen-friendly

management.

(ii) Public-Private Sector Synergy for

Capacity Building

There is no doubt that the process of

globalization and the simultaneous rapid

economic and technological changes

have greatly affected the pattern of

governance in modern times. Scholars

have argued that the actual pattern of

governance in internationalized

environments can be related to the

respective governance capacity of public

and private actors, which hinges in turn

on the strategic constellation underlying

the provision of public goods. The

specific strategic constellations varies

along three dimensions namely, the

congruence between the scope of the

underlying problem and the

organizational structures of the related

actors; the type of good problem; and

the institutional context. For their part,

each of these combines a number of

factors (Knill and Lehmkuh, 2002). The

relationship between public and private

actors is not free from conflict; neither is

it paralyzed by conflict. In essence,

there is a dynamic, synergetic

relationship, with public and private

contributions reinforcing each other

over time. However, such mutual

dependencies between public and

private actors and their concept to cope

with specific problems are apparent only

in the implementation of certain

regulatory arrangements and do not take

into account the problems related to

accountability and the democratic

legitimacy of regulatory structures.

Thus, a crucial question becomes

important: how is it possible to ensure

that private governance activities are

kept responsive to wider societal

interests (ibid 57-58)? The question of

accountability, therefore, becomes a key

factor and an issue of good governance.

(iii) Transparency and Accountability

as Basic Requisites for Good

Governance

If the concept of accountability refers to

the degree to which public servants and

others in non-governmental sectors

providing public programs are

responsive to those they serve, then

there is a need for multi-dimensional

methods to measure how different

institutional arrangements advantage

different forms of responsiveness. The


traditional measures of accountability

that rely upon line or top-down

measures do not necessarily provide a

good guide to the accountability culture

as a whole. As service delivery systems

move to more complex forms of agency,

accountability at other levels must be

expected to undergo a dynamic process

of evolution, adaptation, and in some

cases--crisis. It is clearly not enough to

bemoan the decline of a parliament or

the weakness of the consumer.

Institutional development must fit each

case. Vertical strength can be improved

with stronger roles for parliamentary

committees, ombudsmen, and so on.

Tools for greater horizontal

accountability will need to be different

for competitive systems and for those

using more collaborative methods. In

both cases, a focus upon the role of

reflexive feedback or improvisation

offers a means to reopen the

organizational process box without the

perils of re-regulation. This new domain

of accountability will take some time to

develop its own regime of measures,

standards and rules. Perhaps the most

important step needed is the recognition

that multi dimensionality of

accountability means both multiple

measure and new mandates (Considine,

2002).

(iv) Adoption of IT and the Concept of

E -Governance

The revolution in information

technology has brought into focus its

adoption for good governance. There is

a talk of e-governance all over the

world. E-governance implies a smoother

interface between government and

citizen. While it cannot entirely replace

manual governance, even its limited

applications are good enough to affect

day to day living. It can fulfill roughly

speaking, the four purposes for which

citizens generally interact with the

government (i) paying bills, taxes, user

fees and so on (ii) registration

formalities, whether of a child's birth or

a house purchase or a driving license.

(In Tamil Nadu for instance, one can

download 72 application forms), (iii)

seeking information, and (iv) lodging

complaints. E-governance can reduce

distances to nothing, linking remote

villages to government offices in the

cities, can reduce staff, cut costs, check

leaks in the governing system, and can

make the citizen-government interaction

smooth, without queues and the tyranny

of clerks. But it must be remembered

that E-governance is only a tool for

good governance. It can't succeed

independent of responsive officers, and

it has to be owned by the political

leadership. Otherwise it will only be a

bureaucrat's game (India Today, 2000).

How to rebuild the system of

governance on these new premises

without the majority of population even

being literate is a real challenge for all

concerned with new innovations in the

performance of the government in India.

(v) The Citizen-oriented Paradigm of

Good Governance

The corporate millennium has brought

into focus a new concept of governance

based on the interests of the share-

holders i.e. the citizens, which has

signaled the role of transparency,

accountability and merit-based

management and a sense of morality and

ethics that rests on the principle of

"concern for others." An ethical

organization, more so a government not


only stands for people with a set of

values, but a positive attitude which

generates a culture within the

organization in which every member

feels a sense of loyalty and belonging

and the leaders are responsible for

initiating dialogues across a wide range

of levels and functions so as to

operationalize values in practical

policies.

Modernization of government and

public administration involves a

redefinition of government

responsibilities. The state system of the

21st century will have to see a

redistribution of duties and

responsibilities between government,

business and society. The guiding

principles are the idea of the

“empowering state”, which leaves more

space for society and individual

commitment. The internal structures of

government administration should also

become part of this developmental

process. This would require introduction

of modern management techniques with

quality control, budgeting and cost-

benefit analyses. In future, public

authorities are meant to be results-

oriented in providing public services,

Modern management and e-government

are two central means of achieving

fundamental changes in public

administration. The goal is an

administration that does more and costs

less. E-government projects are not only

modernizing public agencies and

authorities, but also making

administrative procedures more

transparent for ordinary citizens, which

in turn also makes new demands on

personnel to be more accountable

(Fieldman and Khademian, 2001).

(vi) Combating Corruption for Good

Governance

From the foregoing discussion, it is

more than evident that the concept of

quality governance is premised on a

corruption free administrative system.

Combating corruption for sustainable

development calls for (a) reducing

opportunities and incentives for corrupt

behavior and increasing the sense of

accountability on the part of public

officials and (b) effective

implementation of anti-corruption

measures, which would imply that

measures should be logically consistent

with regard to the phasing of a time

table for speedy investigation and

conviction; a strong political

commitment to implement the strategies

and enforcing anti-corruption measures;

and people’s active participation from

below in the enforcement of

administrative, legal and judicial

measures, thus mobilizing the public

against corruption in public life.

Apart from the above fundamental

conditions, it must be emphasized that

fighting corruption requires: (a)

formation of a national coordinating

body that should be responsible for

devising and following up on a strategy

against corruption, along with a citizen’s

oversight board (b) the existence of a

high powered independent prosecuting

body to investigate and prosecute all

such known cases of corruption (c) and

the setting up of special courts for trying

such cases at a stretch so that the cases

come to their legitimate conclusion

without any delay (d) thoroughly

overhauling and reforming the system of

electoral laws and economic regulations

minimizing the temptation to indulge in


corruption practice (e) enactment of an

appropriate legislation to limit the

number of Ministries and Departments

both at the Centre and the states so that

the temptation of expanding ministries

only for political gains could be

minimized and (e) by providing

specialized technical assistance to anti-

corruption agencies organizing high-

level anti-corruption workshops or

strategic consulting or hiring

international investigations to track

down ill-gotten deposits overseas.

At the same time, it is also important

that international institutions should take

steps to encourage participatory

approaches in developing countries in

order to build consensus for anti -

corruption drives and associated

reforms. Civil society is likely to be a

major ally in resisting corruption. More

and more it is this ally that seeks

concrete support from more developed

Western countries and international

agencies in actively combating

corruption (Kaufman,1997, p 130 and

Jain, 2002). International cooperation

can help national leaders develop

political resolve, and international action

can convey the useful truth that we are

all involved in the problem of corruption

and that we must find solutions together.

Intra-Regional and International

Cooperation in Fighting

“Terrorism”

One of the essential pre-condition for

ushering in an era of ‘good governance”

in South Asian nations is to build,

strengthen and enhance the capacity of

political and administrative structures in

each of the nations to be able to fight

terrorism at its door. Apart from

strengthening the internal security

system, the nations of South Asian

region not only have to come to terms to

forge intra-cooperation among

themselves by sharing information, help

and cooperation in purging terrorists,

extradition, built in technological

innovations of warning of terrorist

activities, taking the view that terrorism

is not only a problem of individual

nation alone, but has both intra-regional

and international ramifications. An

international movement has to be

initiated by developing a mechanism to

fight on both intra-regional and

international levels.

Restoring Moral Standards in

Public Life

Finally, one of the important primary

condition towards good governance in

South Asian countries is to restore moral

standards in public life and all political,

administrative and others. I agree that

that is easier said than done. But, given

the incidence of rapid decline in public

values and behavior, it is an essential

strategy towards: good governance” in

all countries of South Asia. This will

also help in combating corruption in

these nations.

To the question what can be done for the

restoration of moral standards and

ethical values in public life, there is no

simple answer. In the context of the

current feeling of resignation to

corruption and unethical and criminal

practices in public life, and the

disposition to consider them as

inevitable and, therefore, acceptable, it

may be well to remember Gandhiji's


observations that "Life is an

aspiration…the ideal must not be

lowered because of our weakness and

imperfections", and the fact of his long-

life resistance to evil in many form--

from racialism and imperialism to

untouchability.

Thus, in addition to the many

suggestions already made above, like

the adoption of various legislative

measures to effectively curb defections,

operation of black money, break the

nexus between electoral politics,

economic resources and criminal

support, and establishing the institution

of Ombudsman, it is necessary that a

rigorous Code of Conduct be drawn for

both Ministers/Legislators and also for

important functionaries of all political

parties, which should incorporate what

the Nolan Committee in the U.K. has

suggested as the seven principles of

public life-- viz., selflessness, integrity,

objectivity, accountability, openness,,

honesty and leadership.

A Public Ethics Committee consisting of

representatives of all Political Parties

and some eminent public persons,

presided over by a retired Justice of the

Supreme Court may be constituted to

enforce, oversee and monitor the

adherence to this code (Jain, 2006).

Operationalizing Good

Governance in South Asia

In order to meet the challenges of good

governance for promoting human

security, a six pronged action plan needs

to be adopted at this juncture of the

evolution of the Indian Polity: which

may as well be relevant for other

developing societies.

a) On the institutional front, it is necessary

to regenerate political and

administrative institutions from the

virtual collapse that India has

experienced in the last three decades --

restore the legitimacy and effectiveness

of the legislature, bureaucracy, the

judiciary and the non-state actors of the

civil society. As the 'sustainability of

transition' in India has been greatly

affected by the gradual incremental loss

of the capacity and effectiveness of the

democratic institutions, it is necessary

that a radical package of reforms to

revamp the institutional framework be

implemented immediately. At the same

time, it is necessary to consolidate and

operationalize the gains of

decentralization of authority and

empowerment of the people especially

the weaker and vulnerable sections of

the population in reality, affected by the

73rd and 74th Amendments of the

Constitution. Initiatives for local

planning coupled with augmenting of

local resources is of utmost for restoring

the credibility of sub-national and local

institutions.

b) In respect of the administrative system,

there is an immediate need to cut down

the size of the government and its

expenditure as early as possible.

Downsizing of bureaucracy has always

been a controversial and complicated

task. But the excessive fat of

governments has to be trimmed down to

make them run faster.

c) One of the other measures adopted in

many western countries to ensure

transparency in the functioning of the

government and to fight corruption and

maladministration is the enactment of

Public Interest Disclosure Acts

popularly called Whistle-blower Acts.

The object of such elements is to

improve accountability in government

and public sector organizations by

encouraging people not to turn a blind

eye to malpractices taking place in their


organizations and to report the same to

the appropriate authority in a

confidential manner or by a public

report. Although the Government of

India has not been able to enact such an

Act, but it has lately been quite

concerned to protect the identity and

person of such officials, albeit with little

success, who have dared to come out

openly to disclose administrative

malpractices to the public. There is a

need for the enactment of such a law to

encourage persons to come out openly

when they smell of scams or corruption

in the government. Transparency in

administrative procedures and decision-

making is an important ingredient of

‘good governance’. The experience of

Government of India has enacted the

Right to Information Act in 2005, but

its implementation has raised a lot of

controversy and confusion, which need

to be clarified immediately for its

smooth operation (Mathur, 2005, p343).

d) Simultaneously, the bureaucracy is to

be revamped in terms of change in its

orientation, behavior and attitude.

Instead of being the defender of the

status quo, there has to be a realization

that with the advent of globalization,

liberalization and privatization, it has to

play a major role of a catalyst for

change. Apart from the changes in the

traditional values and norms of work

culture, it has to demonstrate its

willingness to accept new technical

innovations and values of achievement

and competition, equity and

egalitarianism and concern for broader

collective social goals.

Besides absorbing the values of

participatory democracy,

decentralization of authority and power,

bureaucracy has not only to observe a

modicum of transparency and concede

an appropriate right of information to

the people in its decision-making

process, but has also to secure a balance

between a rule-bound administration

and an administration that can

effectively and quickly deliver results,

particularly in developmental and social

welfare activities.

The bureaucracy is also both under

legal and moral obligation to exercise

its authority and discretionary powers

with a view to meet the norms of

responsiveness and accountability.

Apart from its professional norms of

efficiency, effectiveness, economy and

cost consciousness, the core public

service values of integrity, impartiality

and responsibility need to be observed

if the gains of the process of

liberalization are to be consolidated for

protecting human security.

e) On the economic front, it is of utmost

importance that a comprehensive and

concerted policy strategy based on

general consensus be developed for (i)

revamping public distribution system

(PDS) (ii) disinvestment in public

enterprises in key economic sectors like

power, energy, oil, transport,

telecommunication and in sick

industrial units, and (iii) reconsideration

of proportion of subsidies in

agricultural. oil, and other key sectors

of the economy, which are at best

counter-productive, (iv) creating public-

private synergy in collaborative

governance, and adopting a viable

pattern of contracting out and

outsourcing of delivery of public

services at the local levels of

governance with appropriate safeguards

for accountability, standards of services

and redressal of public complaints.

f) In respect to social security, the system

of governance faces a massive

challenge to provide for adequate

employment generation, good health,

universal education system, shelter, and

the basic facilities of sanitation and

drinking water. Providing for higher

outlays and spending on items like


primary education and primary health-

care is not the solution alone, the real

challenge is effective management on

the part of the administration to deliver

these goods at the lowest costs and in an

equitable manner. These are some of the

areas where the state cannot abdicate its

responsibilities notwithstanding the

emphasis of liberalization and

privatization, increased public and

foreign investments, and contracting out

of the services in various industrial and

other sectors of the economy and social

services., and finally,

g) Utilizing the tools of technology and

‘on-line governance”, wherever

feasible, for quick delivery of services.

Providing information and redressal of

grievances. In the management of

public services, the adoption of

information technology is essential to

eh efficiency of public administration.

Communication to the public through

the Internet and other media is required

to achieve transparency—a condition

for accountability.

Concluding Observations

In conclusion, however, it should be

remembered that for achieving good

governance, no amount of planning and

thinking in all these areas would be

useful unless the governments at all

levels of the polity are capable enough

to take hard and unpleasant decisions

and have the will and capacity to

implement and continuously monitor

and evaluate their impact. At the same

time, the political leadership has to

demonstrate its strong determination to

undertake reforms by first cleaning its

own stable from corrupt and criminal

influences, and setting ethical standards

of quality governance both at the

political and administrative levels. For

changes to come, it is necessary to

change the mindset and attitudes of both

the public administrators and the

politicians in power.

In the perspectives of the worldwide

developments at the threshold of the

21st century, this paper has attempted at

discussing some of the emerging

challenges to quality and “good

governance”, on which the strategies for

growth and sustainable development in

South Asia and in other transitional

societies can be built and

operationalized. It is heartening that

people in almost all South Asian states

have recognized their importance, and it

is likely that the growing concerns

towards poverty removal, fighting

corruption and devising innovations for

‘quality governance” may turn out to be

a concerted international movement, not

confined merely to the realm of

academic discussions or writings in

specific contexts like South Asian

region, but of taking constructive

actions for positive results transcending

the jurisdictions of national boundaries.

This is the only hope for achieving

universally good and corruption-free

good governance in South Asia, for the

very survival of humanity, towards

which we must all strive.


References

Asmerom, H. K. and R. B. Jain (1993), Politics, Administration and Public Policy

in Developing Countries, Amsterdam: VU University Press.

Considine, Mark. (2002), “The End of the Line? Accountable Governance in the age of

Networks, Partnerships, and Joined-Up Services:” in Governance: An International

Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions, Vol. 15, No. 1. January, pp21-40.

Dwivedi, O .P. (1987), “Moral Dimensions of Statecraft”, Canadian Journal of Political

Science, Vol. 20. No. 4, pp. 609-709.

Fieldman, Martha S. and Anne M. Khademian (2001), “Principles for Public

Management Practice: From Dichotomies to Interdependence” in Governance: An

International Journal of Policy and Administration, Vol. 14, No. 3, July, pp339-361.

Ghosal, Baladas (2008), “Ask no Questions” in The Times of India, 18 November 2008,

Delhi ed., p20-23

http://www.eias.org/publications/briefing/1999/weakdev.pdf.pdf

Jain, R. B. (ed.) (1995), NGOs in Development Perspective, Delhi: Vivek Prakashan.

Jain, R. B. (2002), “Implementing Party Reforms in South Asia: Challenges and

Strategies” in NDI-CALD, Political Party Strategies to Combat Corruption, Bangkok: Council of Asian Liberals and Democrats.

Jain, R. B. (2006), “Opening Government for Public Scrutiny: An Analysis of

Recent Efforts in India to make Governance more Transparent and Accountable” in Indian Journal of Public Administration, vol. 52, no. 3, July -September,

pp539-65.

Jain, R. B. (ed.) (2007), Governing Development across Cultures: Challenges and

Dilemmas of an emerging sub-discipline in Political Science, Opladen, Germany:

Barbara Budrich Publishers.

Kaufman, Daniel, (1997), “Corruption: The Facts”, Foreign Policy, Summer.

Knill, Christopher and Dirk Lehmkuh (2002), “Private Actors and the State: Internationalization and Changing Patterns of Governance” in Governance: An

International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions, vol.15, No.1,

January, Oxford, pp41-63.

Leftwich, Adrian (1993), "Governance, Democracy and Development in the Third

World" in Third World Quarterly vol. 14 (3), pp605-24.

Masud, Syed Iftekhar and Muktadir, Shamsul (1999), “Governance in South Asia for a

Peaceful World,” accessed from file

http://www.eias.org/publications/briefing/1999/weakdev.pdf.pdf

Mathur, B. P. (2005), Governance Reform for Vision India, New Delhi:

Macmillan.


Rehman, Sobhan (2000), “Governance and Development in South Asia in Panandiker, V. A. Pai (ed.), Problems of Governance in South Asia, New Delhi:

Konark Publishers.

The World Bank (1989), Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable

Growth, Washington DC.

World Bank (1992), Governance and Development, Washington DC: World Bank.

towards good governance a south asian perspective

Documents