Definition of Governance

Governance is commonly defined as the exercise of power or authority by political

leaders for the well-being of their country’s citizens or subjects. It is the complex
process whereby some sectors of the society wield power, and enact and
promulgate public policies which directly affect human and institutional
interactions, and economic and social development. The power exercised by the
participating sectors of the society is always for the common good, as it is essential
for demanding respect and cooperation from the citizens and the state. As such, a
great deal about governance is the proper and effective utilization of resources.
Governance and Government
1. Governance is traditionally associated with government. In literatures, they
are often used interchangeably. But in the 1980s, political scientists broadened the
meaning of governance as including, not just government actors, but also civil-
society actors.[1] Today, governance includes three sectors: the public sector (state
actors and institutions), the private sector (households and companies), and the
civil society (non-governmental organizations). These three sectors are said to
work hand in hand in the process of governance. This new use of the term focuses
on the role of “networks” in the achievement of the common good, whether these
networks are intergovernmental, transnational, or international.[2] In other words
governance is broader than government in that other sectors are included in it.
2. Many authors also distinguish the two by associating government with
“control and domination,” and governance with “decentralization and relational
management.” On the one hand, government refers to a central institution which
wields power over its subjects. It is the instrument patterned after the model of
“command and control,” the government being in command over the affairs of the
people. On the other hand, governance is closely associated with the concept of
decentralization of power and the need for inter-sectoral management. Governance
is based on the realization that the government cannot do everything for the people,
so that in order to survive the state should not only rely on government but also on
the other sectors of the society.
3. Thus, under the current trend, there is a need to move from the “traditional
hierarchical exercise of power by the government” to the new notion of a
“dispersed and relational power in governance” – from government to governance.
To govern should now mean to facilitate or regulate, not to dominate or command.
PROCESSES AND ACTORS IN GOVERNANCE
Decision-Making and Implementation
Governance entails two processes: decision-making and implementation of the
decision. In broad terms, decision-making refers the process by which a person or
group of persons, guided by socio-political structures, arrive at a decision
 involving their individual and communal needs and wants.  Implementation is the
process that logically follows the decision; it entails the actualization or
materialization of the plan or decision. Governance is not just decision-making
because decision without implementation is self-defeating. Neither is it just
implementation because there is nothing to implement without a decision or plan.
Thus, the two processes necessarily go hand-in-hand in, and are constitutive of,
governance.
Actors and Structures
1. Understanding the two processes requires an analysis of the “actors”
involved and “structures” established for making and implementing a decision. An
actor is a sector or group or institution that participates in the process of
decision-making and implementation. A structure refers to an organization or
mechanism that formally or informally guides the decision-making process
and sets into motion the different actors and apparatuses in the
implementation process.
2. Having such a broad scope, governance has different facets and may be
applied in different contexts, such as corporate governance, international
governance, and national and local governance.[3] In each context, governance has
different actors and structures. Depending on the kind of decision made and the
structure implementing it, governance may be good or bad governance.
3. The government is almost always the main actor in governance, whether
it is in the corporate, international, national or local level. The government is
called the “public sector.” The main role of the public sector is to provide an
enabling environment for the other actors of governance to participate and respond
to the mandate of the common good.
4. All actors other than the government are called the “civil society.” The
civil society includes non-governmental organizations, and other community-based
and sectoral organizations, such as association of farmers, charitable institutions,
cooperatives, religious communities, political parties, and research institutes.
These organizations are private in nature but have public functions or objectives.
The Philippine Red Cross, for instance, is a non-governmental organization. It is a
private charitable institution the serves the community especially during disasters
and emergencies by providing medical assistance and disaster support services.
5. The study of Philippine governance, however, includes the business or
private sector as an indispensable partner in development. To cope with the ever
growing demands of development, the public sector must necessarily tie-up with
the private sector most especially in the financial
6. In the national and international level, decision-making is greatly influenced
by actors like the media, international organizations, multi-national corporations,
 and international donors. Thus, from the foregoing, it should be clear that
governance involves several actors in multi-level structures.
Informal Actors and Bad Governance   
1. Other informal actors also exist, such as organized crime syndicates and
powerful families. Their influence is felt more clearly in local governments, and in
rural and urban areas. Most often than not, these actors are the cause of corruption,
in that legitimate government objectives are distorted by their illegal and private
interests. Worse, they manipulate government officials and agencies, and cause
widespread yet organized violence in the community. In urban and rural areas, for
example, the rich and powerful families control the economy by controlling the
local government officials. They bring about a controlled environment so that
decisions must always favor them. Allegedly, even government officials, both local
and national, are not just influenced but themselves members of organized crime
syndicates with the purpose of using public office and, consequently, public funds
for personal aggrandizement.
2. When these actors and informal structures disrupt, corrupt and upset the
legitimate objectives and ideals of the society, bad governance will result which is
considered as the chief problem of the society. Problems deepen and multiply
because of bad governance. Inasmuch as economics and politics are interrelated,
poor economy is caused by bad governance. International aids and loans, for
instance, are scarce in a badly governed country. International donors and financial
institutions are increasingly basing their aid and loans on the condition that reforms
that ensure “good governance” are undertaken.[4] Recognizing these realities,
current economic and political goals of countries all over the world are aimed at
“good governance.” It is an ideal so broad and elusive the realization of which is
yet to be achieved. More so, the contemporary meaning of “development” is good
governance, or more specifically a reform from faulty governance to good
governance. What good governance is will therefore be discussed next.
 
INDICATORS OF GOOD GOVERNANCE
            Eight Indicators of Good Governance
1. Good governance is understood through its eight indicators or
characteristics: (1) Participatory; (2) Rule of Law; (3) Effective and Efficient; (4)
Transparent; (5) Responsive; (6) Equitable and Inclusive; (7) Consensus Oriented;
and (8) Accountability. They are inextricably related to each other. For instance,
without active participation among the various actors in governance, there would
be a concomitant lack of responsiveness. Likewise, if decision-making is not
transparent, then inevitably there would be no participation, accountability, and
decisions are not consensus oriented. These indicators should, however, be
understood in the context of good “democratic” governance. Some of the
 indicators cannot be applied in other forms of government. For example, good
communist governance could never be consensus oriented or genuinely
participatory.
2. It must also be emphasized that good governance and development should
not be based exclusively on economic growth. Through global persuasion, good
governance and development signify a broader spectrum of things, such as
protection of human rights, equitable distribution of wealth, enhancement of
individual capabilities and creation of an enabling environment to foster
participation and growth of human potentials. As it evolved today, sustainable
development necessitates “people empowerment” and “respect for human
rights.”[5] After all, economic prosperity or the minimization of poverty and
unemployment depends on how the state unleashes the full potential of its human
resource by recognizing their vital roles and according full respect for human
rights.
            Participation
1. Good governance essentially requires participation of different sectors of the
society. Participation means active involvement of all affected and interested
parties in the decision-making process. It requires an enabling environment
wherein pertinent information is effectively disseminated and people could respond
in an unconstrained and truthful manner. It also means gender equality,
recognizing the vital roles of both men and women in decision-making.
2. More fundamentally, the need for participation is a recognition of the limits
of a “verticalized system” of governance. A verticalized system, or the top-down
approach, refers to a state or government monopoly both of powers and
responsibilities. While the government is still the most potent actor in the process
of governance, the participation of other sectors is already a necessity because of
the always evolving complexity and ever growing needs of the societies, especially
in the financial sphere. What should now be utilized is the so-called “horizontal
system” where the government works hand in hand with other sectors of the
society. The different sectors are considered partners of the government in
attaining development goals. Governance should no longer be government
monopoly but government management or inter-sectoral participation.
3. Participation in representative democracies may either be direct or indirect,
and recommendatory or actual. It could be indirect and recommendatory because
in principle the form of government is based on delegation of powers. In the
Philippines, which possesses features of both direct and indirect democracy,
indirect participation is done through public consultations or hearings, while direct
participation is through elections, initiatives and referendums.
4. The management of highly complex societies and of their ever growing
needs requires a participatory form of governance by diffusing power. The move
 for decentralization is a response to this as it widens the base of participation and
allows local government units to exercise governmental powers directly within
their respective districts. Service delivery is enhanced because of the proximity of
local government units to their constituents, and because of the linking which
happens between the national government and regional concerns.
5. Participation is one of the strengths of Philippine governance. The 1987
Philippine Constitution is replete of provisions dealing with relational and inter-
sectoral governance. The Local Government Act of 1989 was borne out of the need
for decentralization in Philippine governance. As such, these and other related
legislations may be considered as normative standards for good governance.
            Rule of Law
1. Democracy is essentially the rule of law. It is through the law that people
express their will and exercise their sovereignty. That the government is of law and
not of men is an underlying democratic principle which puts no one, however rich
and powerful, above the law. Not even the government can arbitrarily act in
contravention of the law. Thus, good democratic governance is fundamentally
adherence to the rule of law.
2. Rule of law demands that the people and the civil society render habitual
obedience to the law. It also demands that the government acts within the limits of
the powers and functions prescribed by the law. The absence of rule of law is
anarchy. Anarchy happens when people act in utter disregard of law and when the
government act whimsically or arbitrarily beyond their powers. In more concrete
terms, rule of law means “peace and order,” “absence of corruption,” “impartial
and effective justice system,” “observance and protection of human rights,” and
“clear, publicized, and stable laws.”
3. What the law seeks to promote is justice. When there is dearth of legislation
for curbing social evils, or even if there is, but the same is ineffectual or
unresponsive, and when there is no faithful execution of the law, then justice is not
attained. When the justice system is biased and discriminatory, when it favors the
rich and the influential over the poor and lowly, or when the legal processes are
long, arduous, unavailable or full of delays, then justice is not attained. Then when
the actors of governance can minimize, if not eliminate, these injustices, then there
is said to be rule of law.
4. Rule of law also requires that laws are responsive to the needs of the society.
Archaic or irrelevant laws must be amended or repealed to cater to modern
demands.
5. The Philippines does not fare well in this aspect of good governance. In spite
of being one of the oldest democracies in the region, the Philippines ranked as last
among seven indexed Asian countries according to the World Justice Project Rule
of Law Index. Generally, the reasons for ranking last are “lack of respect for law,”
 “pervasive and systemic corruption in the government,” and “circumvention of the
law.” Lack of respect for law is generally caused by distrust on the integrity of law
enforcement agencies. Order and security are compromised and criminal justice is
rendered ineffectual.
Systemic corruption has long been a problem in the Philippines that like a
malignant tumor it keeps on sucking the life out of the country. Allegedly, it is the
key officials in the government who direct the perpetration of this crime. What
became clear from a long string of corruption and plunder cases is the true motive
of many aspiring politicians – money. The huge amount of money spent during
election campaigns are but mere investments for a more profitable return during
their term in office.  
In addition, the justice system is flooded by legal practitioners who are experts at
circumventing the law. Circumvention happens when there is compliance with the
letter of the law but violation of its spirit and purpose. Due to technicalities, for
instance, highly paid lawyers can find ways for their rich and powerful clients to
evade the law. Although apparently there is observance of law, it is only superficial
as the real end of the law is forfeited. As such, there is a concomitant violation of
fundamental rights of the people and ineffective administration of justice.
6. Nevertheless, the Philippines has exerted efforts in promoting the rule of
law. The series of cases filed against high ranking officials, previous Presidents,
members of the judiciary, and high profile persons for graft and corrupt practices
prove one thing clearly: the honest drive of the current administration to clean the
government from corrupt traditional politicians. In addition, legislations were made
to hasten the legal process. The “Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004”
(R.A. 9285), for instance, seeks to unclog the court dockets by promoting a speedy,
efficient, and less expensive resolution of disputes. The “Judicial Affidavit Rule”
issued by the Supreme Court in 2013 also lessened to a great extent the time and
expenses of litigation.
Effectiveness and Efficiency
1. Good governance requires that the institutions, processes, and actors could
deliver and meet the necessities of the society in a way that available resources are
utilized well. That the different actors meet the needs of the society means that
there is effective governance. That the valuable resources are utilized, without
wasting or underutilizing any of them, means that there is efficient governance.
Effectiveness (meeting the needs) and efficiency (proper utilization of resources)
must necessarily go together to ensure the best possible results for the community.
2. Concretely, effectiveness and efficiency demands “enhancement and
standardization of the quality of public service delivery consistent with
 international standards,” “professionalization of bureaucracy,” “focusing of
government efforts on its vital functions, and elimination of redundancies or
overlaps in functions and operations,” “a citizen-centered government,” and “an
improved financial management system of the government.”[6]
3. Public service delivery, especially of front-line agencies, must promptly and
adequately cater the needs of the citizens. Doing so requires simplified government
procedures and inexpensive transaction costs. Cumbersome procedures and
expensive costs trigger corruption and red tape. “Red Tape” refers to the disregard
for timeframes in procedures by government agencies through procrastination in
public service delivery or under-the-table or unofficial transactions.[7] To further
curb such possibilities, the government agencies must comply with their citizen’s
charter and use up-to-date information and communications technology to reduce
processing time. There must also be coordination among various government
agencies to eliminate redundant information requirements.
4. Professionalism in Philippine bureaucracy requires competence and integrity
in civil service. Appointments to civil service must be depoliticized and must be
based solely on merits. Effectiveness and efficiency also demands that the
programs and objectives of the various government agencies are aligned with
individual performance goals. The increases in compensation are likewise
necessary for the economic well-being, sustained competence and boosted morale
of the civil servants.
5. Although still insufficient, efforts were made to attain effectiveness and
efficiency in Philippine governance. The Anti-Red Tape Act of 2007 (ARTA), for
instance, was passed to require the setting up of Citizen’s Charter for a simplified
procedure and to facilitate governmental transactions. Also, many government
departments and agencies pursued a rationalization program to check excessive
and redundant staffing.
Transparency
1. Transparency, as an indicator of good governance, means that people are
open to information regarding decision-making process and the implementation of
the same. In legal terms, it means that information on matters of public concern are
made available to the citizens or those who will be directly affected. It also means
that transactions involving public interests must be fully disclosed and made
accessible to the people. It is anchored on the democratic right to information and
right to access of the same. Transparency is necessary not just from government
transactions but also in those transactions of the civil society and private sector
imbued with public interests.
2. The reason why there should be transparency is to promote and protect
democratic ideals. When there is transparency, people are placed in a better
 position to know and protect their rights as well as denounce corrupt or fraudulent
practices in the public sector and in the private sector.
3. Although again insufficient, efforts were made in pursuit of transparency in
Philippine governance. As far as the government sector is concerned, the current
administration, consistent with its drive of curbing corruption, promotes honesty
and integrity in public service. It is currently pursuing the passage of the Freedom
of Information Bill and other related legislations, as well as intensifying people’s
engagement in local governance. Transparency in budget and disbursements are,
however, still far from being substantially implemented.
Responsiveness   
1. Responsiveness means that institutions and processes serve all stakeholders
in a timely and appropriate manner. It also means that actors and structures of
governance easily give genuine expression to the will or desire of the people. In
other words, the interests of all citizens must be well protected in a prompt and
appropriate manner so that each of them can appreciate and take part in the process
of governance. While responsiveness is also a characteristic sought from the
private sector and civil society, more is demanded from the government or the
public sector.
2. Gender equality is engrained in the egalitarian principles of democracy.
Gender concerns that respond to the women and their community must always be
part of the agenda of public sector and civil society. Thus, emerging as important
areas in the study of democratic governance are “Gender and Development” and
“Gender Responsiveness.” The participation of women in governance within the
context of “gendered socialization” rests on how responsive the structures and
processes are to their roles and needs.
3. Some of the important efforts made to attain responsive governance in the
Philippines are decentralization, creation of citizen’s charter in all frontline
agencies (as required by ARTA), and gender sensitivity programs. First, through
decentralization, local governments, which are more proximate to their
constituents, serve more promptly the people, who in turn become more involved
in decision-making. Second, every government agency now has it Citizen’s
Charter, which provides timeframes for every step in attaining frontline services.
Agencies now must also respond to written queries sent by the stakeholders or
interested parties within a period of ten days, otherwise there will be delayed
service. However, this aspect of governance still remains to be one of the causes
for the decline of public’s confidence in the public sector. Although the ARTA has
been passed, there is still so much delay in public service delivery. The failure of
the government agencies to explain the charters to the stakeholders is one of the
main reasons why there is still delay.
            Equity and Inclusiveness
1. Equity and inclusiveness means that all the members of the society,
especially the most vulnerable ones or the grassroots level, must be taken into
consideration in policy-making. Everyone has a stake in the society and no one
should feel alienated from it. Particularly, those who belong to the grassroots level
must not only be the subject of legislation but they must be given the opportunity
to participate in decision or policy making.
2. Social equity refers to a kind of justice that gives more opportunity to the
less fortunate members of the society. It is based on the principle that those who
have less in life should have more in law. Good governance demands that the
actors must give preferential attention to the plight of the poor. Laws must be
geared towards this end and the society must actively participate in the promotion
of the same.
3. The Philippine Government has done extensive efforts in promoting equity
and inclusiveness. The Constitution makes it as one of its state policies the
promotion of social justice. Pursuant to this, the Congress has enacted social
legislations like the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law which aims at freeing
the farmer tenants from the bondage of the soil. Also, representation in the
Congress, under the party list system, is constitutionally mandated to have sectoral
representation of the underprivileged. Gender and Development programs are in
the process of being integrated with the various structures and institutions in the
country. But legislation is one thing; implementation is another. It is in the faithful
implementation of these laws that the country failed. Inequality is especially felt in
the justice system, electoral system, and even in the bureaucracy itself.
            Consensus Oriented
1. Governance is consensus oriented when decisions are made after taking into
consideration the different viewpoints of the actors of the society. Mechanisms for
conflict resolution must be in place because inevitably conflict that will arise from
competing interests of the actors. To meet the consensus, a strong, impartial, and
flexible mediation structure must be established. Without such, compromises and a
broad consensus cannot be reached that serves that best interest of the whole
community.
2. Fundamentally, democratic governance is based on the partnership of the
actors of the society in providing public services. Decisions-making must therefore
entail recognition of their respective interests as well as their respective duties. The
essential of governance could never be expressed in a unilateral act of policy
making by the public sector or other dominant sectors. Public hearings or
consultations in arriving at a consensus are therefore inherently necessary in the
process of governance.
3. Among the things done by the Philippines in promoting a consensus oriented
governance are: (1) creation of a wide-based of representation in the Congress; (2)
 a two-tiered legislature or bicameralism which subjects legislation to the
evaluation of national and district legislators; and (3) necessity of public hearings
or consultations of various governmental policies and actions.
            Accountability
1. Accountability means answerability or responsibility for one’s action. It is
based on the principle that every person or group is responsible for their actions
most especially when their acts affect public interest. The actors have an obligation
to explain and be answerable for the consequences of decisions and actions they
have made on behalf of the community it serves.
2. Accountability comes in various forms: political, hierarchical, and
managerial accountability. Political accountability refers to the accountability of
public officials to the people they represent. Hierarchical accountability refers to
the ordered accountability of the various agencies and their respective officers and
personnel in relation to their program objectives. Managerial accountability refers
to employee accountability based on organization and individual performance. A
system of rewards and punishment must be in place to strengthen the processes and
institutions of governance.
3. The Philippines in the recent years had endeavored to comply with the
requirements of accountability. It had put in action the concept of political
accountability as it held answerable erring public officials involved in graft and
corruption and for acts contrary to the mandate of the constitution. It had also
strengthened parliamentary scrutiny through legislative investigations and creation
of special committees exercising oversight functions. The Office of the
Ombudsman, considered as the public watchdog, has become ever so active in
investigating and prosecuting graft and plunders cases. Citizen’s Charter, as
required by ARTA, was also an important tool in promoting professional public
service values. In this area, Philippine governance has done relatively well.