NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Perspectives on Governance, Democratization and Regime Transition in the Third World After the fall of communism in the late 1980 s, democratic rule became the only legitimate alternative for political reform in developing nations. Consequently, throughout the past decade, the world has witnessed the emergence of a global movement toward democratization a process that, until recently, was commonly regarded as the most effective instrument for inspiring economic growth and development. However, with the growing failure and breakdown of most post-colonial democratic African states, many are now questioning its efficacy as a model for political transition. The standards and understandings at play in the debate over democratization are thus often inconsistent and undefined. As Gordon Hyden notes in African Perspectives of Governance, The usage of the concept varies from being focused on issues of the state as well as the regime. Scholarly analysts as well as those involved in making policy are yet to find agreement on what governance really stands for (Hyden et al. , 2000: 6).
In this vein, the following paper: (1) assesses the interpretations and usages of governance as presented by Hyden et al; (2) addresses the practical and theoretical differences between the various understandings of democratization and regime transition; (3) discusses the value of good governance for citizens of the Third World; (4) concludes by determining which perspective is most accurate. While most thinkers commonly agree that the concept of governance necessarily depends on certain fundamental principles i. e. , governance refers to how power is being exercised and with what results (Hyden et al. , 2000: 6), the scale or focus of the analytical framework in which governance is defined often varies. Generally speaking, the idea of governance is usually considered on one of two levels. In the first, it is thought of primarily in relation to the state and how it carries out its economic and social development mandate (Hyden et al. , 2000: 6).
The second perspective, however, is based on a much broader understanding of its function within a larger political context. Put differently, while the former defines governance in relation to the state and policy-making, the latter analyzes governance within the broader institutional meta-context of political regime. Because [governance], explains Hyden, transcends the boundary of the state, it is a regime issue (i. e. , it relates to the framework of rules that guide both state and society) (Hyden et al. , 2000: 8).
Moreover, Hyden draws an additional distinction between the two frameworks by emphasizing the importance of ethical norms and social rules. While most authors tend to deal with the issue of regime transition in the context of democratization, Hyden et al. further considers the necessary influence of a constantly changing civil society on policy analysis and its implementation. By doing so, Hyden et al appeal to a more permanent theme that gives the concept of regime and, by implication, governance a significance in the study of both policy and politics that it currently does not enjoy (Hyden et al. , 2000: 9). The broader analytical framework employed by Hyden et al.
in the study of governance serves as a basis for understanding and explaining the substantive differences which separate their interpretation of democratization and regime transition from that of other authors. Most immediately, this distinction is clearly evident in the contrasting explanations purported by Hyden et al. and Adrian Leftwich concerning the failure of democratization in several Third World African states (most notably, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Nigeria, and Tanzania). By adopting a more global analysis, Hyden et al attribute the failure of reform efforts to the deterioration and under-development of a necessarily fundamental civil institution the public realm. More specifically, in the case of South Africa, they argue that democratization after independence never succeeded because they failed to break the tribal logic of native authorities that had been established in the name of indirect rule by the British (Hyden et al. , 2000: 14). Simply put, the extreme bipolarity of South Africa s post-colonial urban and rural populations prevented the development of a public realm of a civic kind.
Conversely, Leftwich maintains that the failure of democratization, rather than a consequence of certain civic deficiencies in the larger political regime, resulted from poor public policy and the incapacity of the state. Such transformations, writes Leftwich, have depended less of regime type or policy orientation than on the character and capacity of the state, whether democratic or not. In short, it has been politics and the state rather than governance or democracy that explains the differences between successful and unsuccessful developmental records (Leftwich, 1993: 620). Ironically, democracy therefore depends less on a revival of the public realm and democratic institutions than on the emergence of a necessarily un-democratic developmental state, or what Leftwich describes as a state whose political and bureaucratic elite has the genuine developmental determination and autonomous capacity to define, pursue and implement developmental goals (Leftwich, 1993: 620). The contrast between the perspectives held by Hyden et al. and Leftwich is further demonstrated on a transitional level.
According to Hyden, successful democratization and regime transition necessitates a complete remaking of African governmental systems from the ground up. The post-colonial bureaucratic system, they argue, suffers in three main respects. Firstly, all legislative, executive, and judicial powers reside exclusively in the hands of a select group of appointed officials. Secondly, those in positions of power are neither accountable nor responsive to the governed. Thirdly, the bureaucracy, by stifling local systems of government, incapacitates traditional institutions (Hyden et al. , 2000: 157). In turn, the public sector is inadequate for serving the public while at the same time integral for maintaining the existing systems of power.
Given the extreme economic disparity between those who rule and those who are ruled, the public sector is regarded as a medium for personal gain or advancement. Consequently, the public service lacks even the basic meritocratic features of efficiency, productivity, and other universalistic values (Hyden et al. , 2000: 162). The bureaucratic system, they argue, must therefore be reconstructed within the public realm if democratization is to be successful. Leftwich, however, by failing to consider the civic dimension of bureaucracy in regime transition, becomes hopelessly focused on reform at the state level (Leftwich, 1993: 621).
Political equality, as one of the most important conditions of democratic government, is clearly integral to the process of democratization. In the case of African nations, the exclusion and oppression of women is among the most visible forms of inequality. Unfortunately, because the circumstances that perpetuate gender inequality are less evident, identifying the policy solution necessary for its resolution is difficult. In their discussion of neo-patrimonial systems of African government usually characterized by the complete absence of public accountability, Hyden et al. emphasize that neo-patrimonial ism is also patriarchal, further noting that the way most of Africa s modern rulers have interpreted their traditions is to treat women as second-class subjects, not even second-class citizens. In neo-patrimonial ist systems, women suffer even more than men from the frailty if not absence of a rights culture in society (Hyden et al. , 2000: 21).
And until governments are able to engender the ethical norms of equality within the public realm, any political action at the legislative or state level untenable. Accordingly, Philippe Schmitter, in his recent book Women and Democracy, provides a comprehensive assessment of gender inequality and offers several policy strategies for reform in Third World nations. Unfortunately, like Leftwich and many others, Schmitter begins his analysis on a macro or state level, in which he assumes that a process of democratization is under way (Schmitter, 1998: 223). Put differently, Schmitter takes democratization at face value. Implicit in this notion is the assumption that the current system of government already embodies certain fundamental democratic values such as equal political rights necessary for guiding legislative reform. Before we are able to consider what specific rules, arrangements, or practices are most likely to provide women with access to significant positions of authority in the emerging polity (Schmitter, 1998: 223), we must first assess the civic culture or public realm within which that polity is based.
Democratization and good governance is a process of compromise, struggle, and sacrifice. Democratic government is, more often than not, weighed down by indecision and an inability to produce or inspire action. In this regard, democratization may be far less effective than what is desired, or perhaps even necessary. One could argue, as Leftwich suggests, that, before we can pursue democratic reform, we must first instate an intrinsically un-democratic system of government.
While it is perhaps deficient in these respects, democratic governance, I argue, more than simply an important good, is absolutely necessary for engendering the values, beliefs, mores and ethical norms which constitute the very foundation of any free society. As Hyden et al. explain: Democratic governance is defined as a system that is characterized as a political or constitutional democracy. The two most important universal principles are institutional pluralism and political equality. These ensure that the critical norms of good governance efficient delivery of services, accountability and responsiveness of public institutions, rule of law, and policy pluralism are realized (Hyden et al. , 2000: 154 - 55). Simply put, while it may cause political turbulence at the state level, democratic governance is integral to the successful transition of the larger regime.
With that said, there seems to be little doubt that, of the several interpretations offered, the African Perspective purported by Hyden et al is by far the most insightful and accurate. Their understanding of Third World issues transcends the boundaries sophisticated statistical analysis by recognizing that the Third World can not be understood through economics alone. Like all political regimes, the condition of the Third World is the product of constantly developing complex web of historical, cultural and ethnic developments which, in turn, then form the pillars of a longstanding and dynamic tradition. Only when armed with this understanding is true political reform made possible. Bibliography Hyden et al. , (2000), AFRICAN PERSPECTIVES ON GOVERNANCE. Trenton: Africa World Press Leftwich A. , (1993), Governance, Democracy and Development in the Third World in Third World Quarterly, 14, 3: 605 - 624.
Schmitter, P. C. , (1998), WOMEN AND DEMOCRACY: LATIN AMERICA AND CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE. Boulder: Lynne Render Publishers.
Free research essays on topics related to: third world, political equality, system of government, political reform, gender inequality
Research essay sample on System Of Government Gender Inequality
