The “Good Governance” Concept Revisited

Bibliographic Data

ID9748752
AuthorsVed P Nanda (University of Denver Sturm College of Law, corresponding author)
Year2006
Volume603
Issue1
Pages269-283
Publication date2006-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0002-7162 • E-ISSN: 1552-3349
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/0002716205282847
OpenAlexW2111656999
LanguageEN
Citations received55
References cited27

The term “good governance” is unsettled in its meaning. Through the 1980s and 1990s, donor countries and institutions trended to make aid conditional upon reforms in the recipient country, which was found largely ineffective in encouraging real policy changes. More recently, donors, such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the United States, are increasingly insisting upon performance and good governance as a prerequisite for aid, a practice called “selectivity.” This is a means of requiring a recipient state to demonstrate the seriousness of its commitment to economic and social reforms. There are no objective standards for determining good governance: some aspects include political stability, the rule of law, control of corruption, and accountability. High levels of poverty and weak governance are linked, making selectivity difficult to implement. For reforms to succeed, domestic support, ownership, and commitment are crucial, as are the recipient's cultural context and history

Accountability · Business · Context (archaeology · Corporate governance · Development economics · Economic growth · Economics · Enforcement · Good governance · Language change · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Poverty · Rule of law · Seriousness · Finance · International Development and Aid · Law · Local Government Finance and Decentralization · Religion, Society, and Development