Article

The Notion of Good and Bad Governance in Comparative Perspective*

Bert A. Rockman1, Sung Deuk Hahm2
Author Information & Copyright
1Bert A. Rockman is professor and head of the political science department at Purdue University. E-mail: barockma@purdue.edu.
2Sung Deuk Hahm is professor of political economy at Korea University. E-mail: hahm33@ hotmail.com.

© Copyright 2011 Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University. This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

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.

Keywords: governance crisis; good governance; bad governance; public management