A Comparative Measure of Decentralization for Southeast Asia (original) (raw)
Related papers
Yap - Good Governance and Decentralization in Southeast Asia
2008
Good governance is defined here as "the quality of the relationship between the government and its citizens whom it exists to serve and protect" and operationalized as "the quality of the ways in which decisions on public affairs are reached and are implemented, and by implication the quality of the decisions as such". Criteria for good governance include participation, inclusiveness, transparency, accountability, rule of law, subsidiarity, effectiveness and efficiency.
Modular Comparisons : Grounding and Gauging Southeast Asian Governance
Pacific Affairs, 2014
This paper argues that analytical tensions between comparability and distinctiveness, which often drive a wedge between disciplinary and area-studies debates, are not irreconcilable. Drawing on original research of public governance in Southeast Asia, I contend that layered comparisons – which blend different levels of analytical scope and abstraction – offer a valuable methodological instrument for empirical cross-fertilization. To showcase layered comparisons in practice, I present four interconnected studies of democratic decentralization in Southeast Asia. The analysis combines indepth city-level analyses and subnational cross-sections (that draw heavily on Indonesia’s multilevel governance experience) with an intraregional governance comparison (that expands the focus towards the Philippines and Thailand). To shed further light on the question why democratic decentralization produces desirable outcomes in some polities, but not in others, the discussion fluidly traverses micro/macro-level confines and within-case/cross-case perspectives. In doing so, the concept of layered comparisons provides a methodologically-nuanced perspective on Southeast Asian governance and a means to bridge prevailing area-discipline divides.
2012
As with most concepts in the Social Sciences, governance has had to contend with a plethora of challenges, not the least of which covers questions regarding its meaning. This matter is made even more complicated with the fact that by its very nature, the term is, and indeed may be approached from the perspective of various academic disciplines. Not a single discipline can claim a monopoly on its use. However, a great number of the academic and even practical work on the issue has been made using the lenses of Public Administration (PA). In the Philippines, this is best exemplified by the name it has given to its premier PA academic institution – the National College of Public Administration and Governance (NCPAG). Yet, the fact remains that other disciplines and areas of interest such as Political Science, International Political Economy, Management, Business Administration, and others make use of the term routinely and has in fact arrogated it to form part of their respective lexic...
Comparative Analysis of Local Government Units in Southeast Asian Nations
Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 2024
This study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the organizational structures, financial capacities, citizen engagement mechanisms, technology utilization, and common challenges faced by Local Government Units (LGUs) across Southeast Asian nations. Drawing insights from a diverse range of scholarly works, including books, theses, published dissertations, and electronic journals, the research investigates key dimensions that shape local governance dynamics in the region. The investigation into organizational structures delves into the nuances of centralization vs. decentralization, federal structures, hierarchical frameworks, policy harmonization, and community engagement practices. The study uncovers how these structural variances impact the efficiency and effectiveness of local governance. Examining financial capacities and resource management practices, the research reveals substantial differences among LGUs in terms of the system of government and the subdivision of state. This prompts a call for tailored fiscal policies and collaborative initiatives to optimize resource utilization and financial autonomy. Citizen engagement mechanisms emerge as a focal point, with a notable emphasis placed on fostering inclusive decision-making processes. The study finds a high commitment to citizen involvement within Southeast Asian LGUs, urging continued support for transparent and responsive local governance. Technological adoption and digital strategies come under scrutiny, highlighting disparities, diverse adoption rates, and an increasing embrace of digital communication strategies. Recommendations include addressing digital divides and promoting comprehensive digital strategies for efficient public service delivery and citizen engagement. Finally, the study explores common challenges faced by LGUs in Southeast Asian nations, such as corruption, political dynamics, and capacity constraints. It underscores the interconnected nature of these challenges, emphasizing the need for holistic solutions and comprehensive reforms to strengthen governance structures. This research contributes to the existing literature by synthesizing insights from various sources, providing a nuanced understanding of local governance in Southeast Asia. Policymakers, researchers, and practitioners can leverage these findings to inform strategic interventions, foster collaboration, and promote effective governance practices across the region.
Social and economic changes in the international community in recent decades have diminished the authority and legitimacy of national government in many countries. In Southeast Asia, several countries have experimented with the decentralization reform that aims at reducing the national government prerogatives and transferring administrative responsibilities and functions to the local level. Despite the New Public Management (NPM) philosophy underlying the reform efforts, there is a variety of the implementation processes and outcomes in the Southeast Asian countries (World 2000). In this essay, the main argument is that the political autonomy of a country's national bureaucracy plays an instrumental role in determining the decentralization reform outcome. This degree of political autonomy is contingent upon the power configuration of national government institutions surrounding the time of modern state founding (Riggs 1966; Hutchcroft 2000). With this fundamental argument, this essay offers a comparative analysis of the decentralization reforms in Thailand and the Philippines to demonstrate the role of national bureaucracy in the relationship between central and local governments.
Decentralising Power in 21st-Century Asia
2016
DECENTRALISATION IS A development that has been implemented in various places across the globe over some decades, especially since the early 1990s. It is a function of modern states that in the search for national identity and common citizenship, in the attempt to reach all areas and peripheries, and in the increase of state power more generally, they have deprived local communities of the ability to make their own decisions. Indeed for some states, such Supomo ’ s ‘ integralist ’ Indonesian state, 1
Introduction: Governance in South, Southeast, and East Asia
Public Organization Review, 2013
This special issue explores and analyzes governance and policy issues in South, Southeast, and East Asia. 1 The nine papers in this issue were presented at a similarly titled conference in Dhaka, Bangladesh in 2012. 2 The authors map governance challenges and analyze its current trends from the perspectives of politics and administration. Public administration and governance systems in these regions have witnessed some phenomenal changes during the last three decades and have played a key role in the economic progress, especially in the Southeast and East Asian nations. Rich with evidence and analyses, these papers use empirical and other research methods to examine contemporary bestpractice paradigms. Their additional aim is to develop the understanding of changes in the forms of governance, both within the national context and in a comparative perspective. The regions of South, Southeast, and East Asia contain enormous geographical, cultural, religious, and ethnic variation. They are also "diverse in political and constitutional systems and their performance in managing the economy is uneven" (Haque 2001:1290). Some countries in Southeast and East Asia may already qualify as developed nations, but most of South Asia is beset with poor governance, lack of rule of law, and widespread corruption. This is the case despite these countries, in the last decade or so, witnessing steady and impressive economic growth. In the context of governance, the huge differences in the South, Southeast, and East Asian countries reflect the countries' unique cultures, history, demography and geography, political
Decentralization and Regional Autonomy in Indonesia
2009
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.