Governance, good governance and global governance: Conceptual and actual challenges
In: Third world quarterly, Band 21, Heft 5, S. 795-814
ISSN: 1360-2241
In: Third world quarterly, Band 21, Heft 5, S. 795-814
ISSN: 1360-2241
In: Governance: an international journal of policy and administration, Band 26, Heft 3, S. 347-368
ISSN: 1468-0491
This commentary points to the poor state of empirical measures of the quality of states, that is, executive branches and their bureaucracies. Much of the problem is conceptual, as there is very little agreement on what constitutes high‐quality government. The commentary suggests four approaches: (1) procedural measures, such as the Weberian criteria of bureaucratic modernity; (2) capacity measures, which include both resources and degree of professionalization; (3) output measures; and (4) measures of bureaucratic autonomy. It rejects output measures and suggests a two‐dimensional framework of using capacity and autonomy as a measure of executive branch quality. This framework explains the conundrum of why low‐income countries are advised to reduce bureaucratic autonomy while high‐income ones seek to increase it.
In: Center for Global Development Working Paper No. 314
SSRN
Working paper
In: Revista española de ciencia política, Heft 12, S. 189-192
ISSN: 1575-6548
In: The political quarterly: PQ, Band 76, Heft 4, S. 469-470
ISSN: 0032-3179
In: The political quarterly, Band 76, Heft 4, S. 469-470
ISSN: 1467-923X
In: Stanford Law and Economics Olin Working Paper No. 565
SSRN
In: Regulation & governance, Band 16, Heft 1, S. 45-62
ISSN: 1748-5991
AbstractThis article examines how modes of governance are reconfigured as a result of using algorithms in the governance process. We argue that deploying algorithmic systems creates a shift toward a special form of design‐based governance, with power exercised ex ante via choice architectures defined through protocols, requiring lower levels of commitment from governing actors. We use governance of three policy problems – speeding, disinformation, and social sharing – to illustrate what happens when algorithms are deployed to enable coordination in modes of hierarchical governance, self‐governance, and co‐governance. Our analysis shows that algorithms increase efficiency while decreasing the space for governing actors' discretion. Furthermore, we compare the effects of algorithms in each of these cases and explore sources of convergence and divergence between the governance modes. We suggest design‐based governance modes that rely on algorithmic systems might be re‐conceptualized as algorithmic governance to account for the prevalence of algorithms and the significance of their effects.
SSRN
Working paper
In: Journal of public administration and governance, Band 9, Heft 3, S. 133
ISSN: 2161-7104
Good Governance has been in argument from three decades in context of theoretical approach. It is specified and encompassed in Political Science of development in reverence of administrative component to achieve Social goals of society. The wide range of Good Governance topic has been understood to create an atmosphere of Accountability, Transparency, Rule of Law, Consensus orientation, Effectiveness and Efficiency so as to develop the region with international and national standards of the State. Good Governors relates to the institutional reformation Process and Political Will regarding Peace and sustainable development of the region.This research paper defines Good Governance with its all essential elements to achieve the development programs with the long range values, whereas, Political participation with the democratic ideas for achieving the goal of maintainable development of the region. The vision of good governance is discussed on boarder vision from institution to the state and Socio-economic factor is emphasized through the good governance reformative period.
SSRN
Working paper
In: Policy & politics: advancing knowledge in public and social policy, Band 44, Heft 4, S. 663-675
ISSN: 0305-5736