The Notion of Good and Bad Governance in Comparative Perspective*
Received: Jun 20, 2011; Revised: Jun 23, 2011; Revised: Aug 03, 2011; Accepted: Aug 10, 2011
Published Online: Aug 31, 2011
Abstract
A governance crisis may not only be detrimental to public trust of the government, but can also be a source of economic stagnation and social instability. Good and bad governance has become an indispensable line of research in public management. Scholars and practitioners in public management are concerned about what makes some government institutions better than others. This paper first explores the theoretical evolution of the term “governance” as distinct from “government.” Second, it sorts out factors related to definitions and measurements of good and bad governance in comparative perspective based on two competing theoretical frameworks for understanding these concepts: principles and consequences. Third, it provides criteria for the notion of good and bad governance and argues that it is multidimensional, continuous rather than discrete, conditional, consequential, and empirical as well as philosophical. Finally, this paper identifies emerging challenges and opportunities for advancing understanding of good and bad governance.
Metrics
QR Code of this Article:
Related Articles
The Bureaucratic Perils of Presidentialism: Political Impediments to Good Governance in Latin America
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2021;36(4):1-14.
Errors in Public Management and Congressional Oversight
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2019;34(2):29-50.
Strategies for Governing: An Approach to Public Management Research for West and East
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2018;33(1):33-56.
Dissimilar Public Management Paradigms, Similar Adoption: Finding an Approach Contingent on Policy Goals
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2016;31(1):63-85.
The Rural Saemaul Undong Revisited from the Perspective of Good Governance
Korean J. Policy Stud. 2011;26(2):17-43.