Globalization,governance, and Administrative Culture

ABSTRACT

Globalization forces are colliding with international and national systems of governance, giving rise to a limited sovereignty of the nation-state. Globalization has also negatively affected poor countries and, in its wake, contributed to violence, hunger, and deprivation despite its powerful technological innovations and new economic, cultural, administrative, and political initiatives. This study conceives globalization, good governance, and the culture of governing as inextricably connected. After reviewing positions by proponents and opponents, the authors conclude that the dysfunctions of globalization are threatening the very foundation of developing nations’ systems of effective governance. Based on a review of developments in countries of the Middle East and South Asia, the authors believe that to serve the transformative process, leading to good governance and democratic development, globalization has to take account of important indigenous value systems.     

Does democratic local governance facilitate local economic development? Evidence from Bangladesh

ABSTRACT

This paper tests whether the improvement of democratic local governance (DLG) positively impacts local economic development (LED). Based on a nationally representative citizen perception survey of 3,024 households across 56 Union Parishads (UPs) in Bangladesh, the results suggest that, although the UP governance program (UPGP) has improved the administrative governance of UPs, functional governance involving citizens remains weak. Thus, due to partial improvement of DLG, UPGP does not appear to have a significant impact on the overall local economic development and service delivery of UPs. A significant gap can be seen to exist between the claims of UPs and the perceptions of citizens around UPs’ governance performance, which may result from the poor awareness building structures of the UPGP. However, our results suggest that providing training to UP officials can partially offset the shortfalls of DLG in its pursuit of LED.     

Implementing Electronic Notification in Los Angeles: Citizen Participation Politics by Other Means

Abstract

This paper considers whether new information and communication technologies have significant effects on citizen participation by evaluating the development of a major innovation in electronic governance. We analyze the creation of an electronic system in Los Angeles to provide stakeholders a warning of upcoming political decisions and an opportunity to furnish feedback. We evaluate this innovation not only as a technological innovation that affects citizens’ capacity and motivation for participation but also as an alternative institutional means for involving citizens in policy making and public administration. To place this experiment within this larger institutional perspective, we draw upon the lessons of historical reforms aimed to expand citizen participation. We find that although technology does positively affect individuals’ capacity and motivations, technology, by itself, does not overcome the political, institutional, and behavioral impediments that have limited previous participatory reforms.     

Reinventing Governance for Performance in South Asia: Impacts on Citizenship Rights

Abstract

In line with the global trend of “reinventing governance” based on market‐driven policies and structures, South Asian countries have adopted some major reforms in governance during the recent two decades. While this market‐led shift in governance is largely intended to enhance its performance in terms of greater efficiency and quality, there is a tendency to overlook its implications for the rights and entitlements of citizens in these countries. The article examines the basic tenets or features of this transition in governance, encompassing the replacement of public sector by private sector and the transformation of public management based on business principles. The main objective, however, is to examine the critical impacts of this new mode of governance on the political and social rights of citizens in South Asia. The article concludes by stressing the need for paying adequate attention to citizenship rights in pursuing such reforms in governance.     

From Innovation to Convention: Legitimate Citizen Participation in Local Governance

In governance structure legitimacy is required not only of the governing system, local authorities or public organisations but also of other participants, including citizens. The legitimacy cannot be judged either by traditions of representative democracy or by innovative theories of deliberative or participatory democracy. The article analyses scientific publications on citizen participation in local governance. It asks how empirical studies on local sustainable development planning (SDP) and New Public Management (NPM) practices construct legitimate citizen participation. In general, studies on citizen participation have not conceptualised the relations between citizens and power holders as questions of legitimacy. However, the studies approaching citizen participation in the local processes of SDP and NPM include various empirical, theoretical and normative arguments for citizen participation. These arguments recognise, accept and support particular activities, arguments and outcomes of citizen participation, and include and exclude agents and issues. They construct and reflect the definition of legitimacy in the local governance. As constructed by scientific texts, justifications for citizen participation reproduce a discursive structure in which citizen participation becomes marginalised and citizens’ views excluded. The results illustrate that discursive structures of legitimate citizen participation support conventional governing practices and hinder innovative practices in local governance.     

Public Support for Democratic Governance in Southeast Asia

Abstract

The transition and consolidation of democracy in Southeast Asia has proven fragile and tenuous some 30 years after the current wave of democratization began. A critical ingredient in the process of democratization is the role of public opinion and the extent that the public supports the democratic ‘rules of the game’. This study uses 2006 and 2007 public opinion data from the AsiaBarometer Survey of six Southeast Asian countries (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand, Cambodia and Singapore) to examine popular perceptions of democracy and democratic principles and practices. Specifically, it seeks to shed light on the following interrelated questions: Do democratic institutions in Southeast Asia work well in the short and long term? To what extent are citizens in these countries satisfied with various political and civil freedoms? Do citizens trust specific institutions to operate in the best interests of their society? Does the current political system and government perform well?     

Participation in Transition: Mobilizing Ugandans in Constitution Making

Can participatory programs in transitioning countries increase the involvement of citizens beyond the level expected from individual-level characteristics, such as demographic traits, socioeconomic resources, and civic orientations? To answer this question, I examine the causes of participation in the Ugandan constitution-making process. Statistical analysis of a random sample survey of 820 citizens demonstrates that although individual-level factors play a role, many Ugandans participated because mobilizing agents pulled them into the process. I argue that programs to encourage active and equal participation will be most successful if they supplement weak indigenous institutions of mobilization and help all types of citizens to participate early on in the transition to democracy.     

In Search of Regional Governance in East Asia: Processes and Outcomes

Abstract

This article employs the concept of ‘regional governance’ to analyze both the processes and outcomes of the emerging regional institutional arrangements in East Asia. It argues that while ASEAN has played a significant role in creating and sustaining the ‘processes’ of wider East Asian regional governance efforts, the level of achievement in translating these processes into tangible ‘outcomes’ remains severely constrained by great power rivalry, especially between Japan and China. By focusing on the areas of trade and finance, this article argues that the varying levels of outcomes between these two issue areas can be explained primarily by the degree of convergence between Japanese and Chinese interests. In particular, while Japan and China have a shared interest in contributing to the promotion of regional financial stability, they strongly disagree over the appropriate form and contours of a trade governance system.     

China's Labyrinth: The Rise of Monitory Democracy

The new element in governance is social media. Inexorably, its fertile networks of shared information shift power from authorities to citizens and amateurs, including to the “unknown” experts in the “dorm rooms and edges of society” who drive innovation. Tweets may bust trust and undermine authority, but can social media also be a tool for building consensus through deliberation and negotiation among interests? When it comes to governance, is crowd‐sourcing any better than populism at generating collective intelligence instead of disruptive “dumb mobs?” Can networks aid the self‐administration of society, or does that take institutions with governing authority? In this section, leading Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, technologists and network theorists from Google, Microsoft and the MIT Media Lab join with political scientist Francis Fukuyama and top thinkers from Asia to address these issues.     

From the ASEAN People's Assembly to the ASEAN Civil Society Conference: the boundaries of civil society advocacy

Civil society organisations (CSOs) have asserted their claim for participation in regional governance in Southeast Asia through multiple forums held since the late-1990s. The two most enduring are the ASEAN People's Assembly (APA), organised by ASEAN-ISIS and held seven times from 2000 to 2009, and the ASEAN Civil Society Conference (ACSC), organised by the Solidarity for Asian People's Advocacy network and held nine times from 2005 to the present. Through comparative analysis of the boundaries of CSO participation in these two events, this article explains why the APA was superseded by the ACSC, and it highlights states' growing intrusions into the ACSC. It argues that states' expanding repertoire of tactics to direct the ACSC has seen the structure of CSO participation in this event recast, challenging the view of the ACSC as an independent space for advocacy and indicating the hollowness of ASEAN's commitments to creating a ‘people-oriented’ Association.     

The Right to Connect and Internet Censorship

The new element in governance is social media. Inexorably, its fertile networks of shared information shift power from authorities to citizens and amateurs, including to the “unknown” experts in the “dorm rooms and edges of society” who drive innovation. Tweets may bust trust and undermine authority, but can social media also be a tool for building consensus through deliberation and negotiation among interests? When it comes to governance, is crowd‐sourcing any better than populism at generating collective intelligence instead of disruptive “dumb mobs?” Can networks aid the self‐administration of society, or does that take institutions with governing authority? In this section, leading Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, technologists and network theorists from Google, Microsoft and the MIT Media Lab join with political scientist Francis Fukuyama and top thinkers from Asia to address these issues.     

Democracy and the Smart Mob

The new element in governance is social media. Inexorably, its fertile networks of shared information shift power from authorities to citizens and amateurs, including to the “unknown” experts in the “dorm rooms and edges of society” who drive innovation. Tweets may bust trust and undermine authority, but can social media also be a tool for building consensus through deliberation and negotiation among interests? When it comes to governance, is crowd‐sourcing any better than populism at generating collective intelligence instead of disruptive “dumb mobs?” Can networks aid the self‐administration of society, or does that take institutions with governing authority? In this section, leading Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, technologists and network theorists from Google, Microsoft and the MIT Media Lab join with political scientist Francis Fukuyama and top thinkers from Asia to address these issues.     

Citizen participation matters. Bureaucratic discretion matters more

New Public Governance theory increases citizen participation and expands bureaucrats' roles in the work of government. Citizen participation creates new mechanisms for citizens to influence the policy process. Bureaucrats' expanded roles allow for broader bureaucratic discretion over policy implementation. When citizens' and bureaucrats' views on public management decisions collide, whose views prevail? Do citizen volunteers or bureaucrats have greater influence over public decisions? We answer this question by studying the U.S. Department of Energy's initiative to engage citizens in environmental clean-up decisions. We assess 10 years of meeting records and administrative decisions using a three-step, mixed-method analysis to identify, weigh, and test the influence of citizen participation and bureaucratic discretion. The results indicate that while citizen participation matters, bureaucratic discretion has a more significant influence over administrative decision-making. The findings expose holes in New Public Governance theory, which has implications for democracy and demands deeper thought into structuring citizen participation.     

Yin and Yang: Sina Weibo and the Chinese State

The new element in governance is social media. Inexorably, its fertile networks of shared information shift power from authorities to citizens and amateurs, including to the “unknown” experts in the “dorm rooms and edges of society” who drive innovation. Tweets may bust trust and undermine authority, but can social media also be a tool for building consensus through deliberation and negotiation among interests? When it comes to governance, is crowd‐sourcing any better than populism at generating collective intelligence instead of disruptive “dumb mobs?” Can networks aid the self‐administration of society, or does that take institutions with governing authority? In this section, leading Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, technologists and network theorists from Google, Microsoft and the MIT Media Lab join with political scientist Francis Fukuyama and top thinkers from Asia to address these issues.     

SOCIAL TRUST,IMPARTIAL ADMINISTRATION AND PUBLIC CONFIDENCE IN EU CRISIS MANAGEMENT INSTITUTIONS

In this article, we investigate whether differences in social trust and impartial public administration have an impact on public confidence in EU crisis management institutions. Our assessment is based on a cross‐country comparison using aggregate country‐level data of the member states in the European Union. Earlier studies on the EU as a crisis manager have not carefully studied to what extent differences in social trust and administrative culture may or may not matter. Our analysis shows that in countries where citizens are treated impartially by their own national public administration institutions, people are less likely to support EU‐coordinated civil protection efforts. In contrast, in places where citizens perceive their government's treatment of them as partial and unfair, citizens will tend to support EU‐coordinated civil protection.     

Civil Society’s Claims to Political Representation in Brazil

Civil society is laying claim to political representation in contemporary democracies, destabilizing long-standing ideas about democratic legitimacy. The participatory governance structures that have emerged alongside classic institutions of representative democracy encompass not only direct citizen participation but also political representation by civil society actors. Using original data from São Paulo, Brazil, we show that most of civil society actors that work for the urban poor claim political representation of their “constituency.” Theirs is more often than not an “assumed representation,” we suggest, because our data show that most lack formal members and do not select leaders through elections. Civil society actors (in contrast to political parties and labor unions) lack historically settled and politically sanctioned mechanisms to authorize and hold accountable their representation. This new layer of political representatives therefore faces a historic challenge—constructing novel notions of democratic legitimacy that can support their forms of representation. We examine what new notions of representations are emerging and trace the historic roots of the most widespread and promising that focus on remedying inequality in access to the state.     

Local Government Public Servants Performance and Citizens Participation in Governance in Nigeria

Abstract

This paper examines the performance of public administrators at the local government level in Nigeria. It traces the development of local governments in Nigeria from 1945 to present times. It argues that the shift in the critical decision‐making powers and functions of local government requires its public administrators to be better‐trained professionals. However, without citizens' participation in governance, public servants' accountability will be low. The study addresses the following questions: How do public sector performance and development of actions by citizens affect accountability in the local governments? How much training do public administrators in Nigeria's local governments have in public management? What is the relationship between performance and citizenship participation in local governments' development process? The question of interests in this study is how public administration at the local government level can better serve Nigeria's communities and in so doing develop authentic relationship with citizen groups, and equitably enhance public trust, legitimacy, and performance of the public sector in the nation.     

Social Capital and Community Participation in Post-Soviet Armenia: Implications for Policy and Practice

This article argues that the social capital framework used by development agencies in community-driven development projects in post-Soviet countries may not be adequate for analysing conditions affecting community participation. Research in Armenia shows that the availability of social capital in a community may not necessarily translate into participation. The governance environment plays a key role in affecting the nature and forms of community participation and in shaping local institutions in Armenia. The research argues against the ‘cultural’ view of institutional change, which presumes that the main barriers to participation are posed by cultural factors, such as interpersonal trust and the ‘mentality’ of post-Soviet citizens. Development interventions that focus on building social capital as a means to promote community participation may not be effective without addressing broader structural factors affecting participation.