Good
Governance as a Tool of Sustainable Development
1.
Introduction
In the period from the
fifties to the eighties the dominant approach to development was based on
orientation to increase the economic growth (Khan, 2007). After the World War
II the main issue for developed countries was to maintain the economic growth
while developing countries focused their attention on achieving the target of
GDP growth which would, as it was assumed, automatically lead to a higher level
of quality of life (Wang et al., 2008).
Some scholars point out the difference between growth and development
and scholars are slowly beginning to embrace these differences. According to
Banik and Yoonus (2012) the economic growth is a univariate concept measured
purely on the basis of increasing in GDP per capita and much narrower concept
compared to the development which is seen as a multivariate concept aimed at
achieving quality of life. Stiglitz (1998) also perceives the importance of GDP
growth but expresses the need to adopt a broader development focus. According
to him GDP per capita is a means but not an end to improvement of living
standard, health and education conditions and reduction of poverty. Leichtová
et al. (2007) suggest that the growth in GDP per capita says little about real
conditions in which people live. Soubbotina (2004) believes that the
sustainable economic growth in developing countries is crucial for reducing
poverty and increasing the standard of living, but also argues that economic
growth is not enough. Nayyar (2006) indicates that the last half of the
twentieth century has been characterized by enormous economic progress in the
world based on a significant level of growth of global GDP. He also indicates
that around 830 million people suffer from malnutrition, while 1.2 billion have
no access to clean water, and even 2.7 billion people have no access to
adequate sanitation facilities. Some scholars warn that despite the substantial
economic growth and industrialization of many countries, the level of poverty
continues to increase (Minujin et al., 2002; Plewes et al., 1996). According to
Mitlin (1992), economic growth does not contribute to enrichment of the
majority of population. In favor of this claim is the fact that 1% of the
richest population has the same amount of income as the poorest 57% of the
population (De La Barra, 2006). Ayub (2013) warns that too much inequality is
destructive to economic growth, noting that the equality of income is an
important precondition for sustainable development. The institutionalization of the approach of
sustainable development appears after the adoption of the report Our Common
Future in 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development of the
United Nations, known as the Brundtland Report. This report provided the most
famous definition of sustainable development - “development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs” (UNWCED, 1987).
According to Yamaguchi (2003), sustainable development represents the
ideology of development strategies that need to solve previous destructive
effects on development. Rees (2002) points to the growing criticism of
expansionist theory that is closely related to the neoliberal paradigm where
the economy is seen as an independent, self-regulating and self-sustaining
system. Having in mind that the model of good governance is a child of
neoliberal ideology, there is a growing concern about the possibility that this
will ensure balanced approach to different and very heterogeneous values of sustainable
development. In this regard, Mitlin (1992) warns that there is little agreement
on how to achieve sustainable development goals.
2.
Methodology
The basic layer of the
analysis includes consideration of the effects on sustainable development of
two different research models: the aggregate model of good governance and the
disaggregate model of good governance.
3.
Conclusion
Regardless of certain
evidence that at first glance may indicate the connection between good
governance and sustainable development, the existing literature also shows
different points of view on the real effects of good governance. The reason for
the critical analysis of the impact of good governance on sustainable
development can be found in over-generalization of these ties without taking
into consideration the specific characteristics of specific country or region.
By accessing the "one size fits all" approach many significant
problems have occurred in the implementation of the public sector reforms
leading to the ineffectiveness of development aid and spending limited
financial resources without achieving the objectives of sustainable
development. In this sense, the multi-dimensional nature of the model of good
governance and the heterogeneity of different goals of sustainable development
are not recognized. Although our findings confirm the existence of the effects
of good governance on selected indicators of sustainable development, the
in-depth analysis of these relationships shows a more colored picture. The
empirical study of the effects of good governance dimensions on the selected
indicators of sustainable development, based on cross-sectional research from
the perspective of different categories of countries, shows different
statistical significance, intensity and direction of impact. The empirical
findings ask for a significant review of the reform agenda of public
governance. These findings are very challenging for the principles of
post-Washington Consensus aimed at promoting model of good governance as a
universal remedy for development in countries with different characteristics.
References
:
Stojanovic, Ilja; Ateljevic, Jovo; Stevic, R Stevan.
(2016). European Journal of Sustainable Development: Good Governance as a Tool
of Sustainable Development. ECSDEV: Via dei Fiori, Vol. 5(4), p. 558-573
