The process of choosing this article begins by searching an article which I found interesting. I have decided that the topic will be decentralization since I am interested in the positive effect of decentralization, as being constantly discussed by academics and public policy practitioners in recent years. The article is found using the ANU Library’s website by searching on scholarly and peer review journal listing about decentralization, and limiting it to policy/political science field. Moreover, I decided to be more precise by combining it with another topic which I reckon interesting such as economic development, and choosing the country which I best known, Indonesia. After reading all the journals that I found, I decided that this article is the proper article. The reason for choosing this journal based on the relevance, focus to the topic decentralization and how it may affect the economic performance of a country such as Indonesia. The language of this article is quite clear and easy to understand and it gives a good understanding about decentralization topic and the scholarly and the world debates around the topic.
This journal article is aimed to study whether decentralization has generated improved economic performance in Indonesia (Pepinsky & Wihardja 2011). In this article the authors' finding is arguing that in Indonesia, the decentralization has no major effect on the country national economic performance. Since 2001, Indonesia has promoted political and economic decentralization on its provincial territory. Even though decentralization is seen by international development agencies and many political economists as promising development tools, the effect in Indonesia is not significant (Pepinsky & Wihardja 2011). T...
... middle of paper ...
...tistical technique to explain the causality between decentralization and economic performance.
This journal article is a good article since it has a good question about the effect of decentralization. It aims for causal explanation whether decentralization indeed contributes to economic performance in emerging countries such as Indonesia. The finding in this article contributes to the ongoing debates about the effect of decentralization in the scholarly and the real world. This article finding gives understanding to the politicians and development specialist that the theory which stated decentralization lead in the increase economic performance of a nation may not true and cannot be generalized.
Works Cited
Pepinsky, TB & Wihardja, MM 2011, ‘Decentralizationa and economic performance in Indonesia, Journal of East Asian studies, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 337-371
71). Despite the fact that the primary objective of decentralization has been rapidly obtained as cities and villages currently revel a higher level of responsibilities, the level of transparency, liability, accountability, and strong clear administrative institutions are still missing, inflicting numerous challenges to the success of the decentralization procedure and impeding the combat against corruption (Strachan, 2014a, p. 14). The facts demonstrate that implementation of decentralization has actually introduced fresh agents and actors, while altering the course of actions of corruption at local levels, elevating possibilities/incentives for the authorities to conduct affairs in a corrupted manner (Strachan, 2014a, p. 14). Local governments currently take advantage of a broad variety of discretionary proxy and superintendence over the utilization of more than 50 percent of the government budget (Hunes et al., 2014, p. 46), while incorporating over-resourcing from timber and mineral and having no appropriate inner and outer accountability arrangements in
Strong institutions are associated with high levels of real per capita income since they shape overall conditions for investment and growth (IMF 2003). For example, where corruption and appropriation of private property are common, the potential returns on investments are reduced and possibly eliminated altogether. Political control of resources may also limit the extent to which firms can secure the inputs they need for production. Formal institutions also influence the balance of diversionary (rent-seeking) and productive activities in society (Hall and Jones 1999). Countries with a history of institutions that support productive activities such as capital accumulation, skill acquisition, invention and technology transfer produce much higher levels of output per
Singapore as a country has had various transformations throughout its history, however the period 1950 and 1970 was quite critical. Much of these changes had a lot to do with the development of trade and manufacturing. This is without forgetting the financial sector where the intention was to come up with a financial hub that could be used in economic development. Looking at the case of Singapore, we would say that it is a productive economy with a very high market competition. This observation has been further clarified by the Swiss International Institute for Management Development, going with their report that they released in the year 2001 (Chellaraj & Mattoo, 2009). In this study, we intend to evaluate the case of political economy of development in Singapore and examine the tensions between the state and various economic institutions. In additions to examining this institution, we would also like to examine how these variables have contributed towards the attainment of favorable growth rates and economic prosperity.
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...
Malaysia is located in the south-eastern Asia, bordering Thailand and northern one-third of the island of Borneo, bordering Indonesia, Brunei, and the South China Sea, south of Vietnam. Due to its locations, it has been colonised since the late 18th centuries by many countries. Since 1965, Malaysia has had one of the best economic records in Asia, with GDP average of 6.5% growth for almost 50 years. The economical development especially boosted during 1981 and 2003 under the governance of Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad. Malaysia succeeded in diversifying its economy from dependence on exports of raw materials to expansion in manufacturing, services, and tourism. Also, the current Prime Minister continues to pursue pro-business policies .
Explore how a transition from an autonomous structure to a centralized structure affects regional performance.
Up until this point, this paper has discussed a particular instance in which State Intervention in the economy exerted negative outcomes on industrialization. Henceforth, this paper will now look at the circumstances in which State Intervention can wield beneficial outcomes on industrialization for a developing country. The Neopatrimonial State, which sits on one end of the spectrum in terms of the effectiveness of State Intervention, means that the Cohesive Capitalist State is typically the polar opposite and in turn, can experience positive results from State Intervention.
The economy of a nation is a major indication of its success. One aspect of a nation's economic success or failure is the system of government. Whether a nation is socialistic, communistic, ruled by absolute sovereignty, or based on capitalistic principles can be a key factor in a country's economic success or failure. Government is the foundation of an economy but it is not what determines its success. Issues that determine a nation’s economic success include growth strategies, improved or increased resources, investment and savings, government policies, trade, foreign direct investment, income distribution, labor allocation, innovations in technology, and several other economic issues. I feel that economic growth is the main indicator of economic success. Additionally, innovations in technology, improving human capital, and improving foreign direct investment (FDI) are three issues that can lead to economic growth.
There are at least four different research perspectives about the relationship between development and economic growth. Firstly, economic growth is the basis for social development. Secondly, economic growth and social development are not necessarily linked. Thirdly, both economic growth and social development are not basic causes by each other, but they depend on interaction. Fourthly, social development is the prerequisite for economic growth (Mazumdar. 1...
According to Sapru R.K. (2008) p370-371 the traditional ideal of public administration which inclined to be firm and bureaucratic was based on processes instead of outcomes and on setting procedures to follow instead of focusing on results. This paradigm can be regarded as an administration under formal control of the political control, constructed on a firmly ranked model of bureaucracy, run by permanent and neutral public servants, driven only by public concern. In emerging nations the administration was true bureaucracy meaning government by officers. In this perspective Smith (1996) p235-6 perceived that“the bureaucracy controls and manages the means of production through the government. It increases chances for bureaucratic careers by the creation of public figures,demanding public managers, marketing boards.
Lim, Joseph Y. and Montes, Manuel F. "The Structure of Employment and Structural Adjustment in the Philippines." Journal of Development Studies v.36
Rana, P., 1995. ‘Reform Strategies in Transitional Economies: Lessons from Asia’, World Development, Volume 23(7): 1157-1169
The rationale behind selecting these three countries as the subject of this comparative analysis with Pakistan is that, they all achieved independence in the same decade, were at a similar stage of economic development and had similar levels of GDP per capita initially. By researching and investigating the social indicators, the reforms and the policies of these four countries, over the preceding 60 years, this paper will help to identify the factors that may help explain the subsequent divergence in the rate of development of these countries.
Even though there’s no direct relationship between democracy and economic growth, CIPE (Centre for International Private Enterprise) elaborates upon how in the long term, democracy principles of redistribution of growth produce a stable and positive environment for innovation and investments that lead to prosperous economic growth. As most principles of democracy, this looks great on paper, but in reality, it’s catastrophic. After all, as explained by Professor Blair on the New York Times, democracy isn 't an economic system; it is a system of self-governance that has slowly been taken over by capitalism. For a democracy to deliver, a stronger union of people acting together for common causes and issues is necessary, not a union of corporate interests and endless economic growth at the expense of the people. Our inclusive democratic rule is a matter of capitalistic democracy played by the hands of massive corporates. This is not what a democratic nation should stand for. Let’s look at Asia’s two largest nations. In 1980, India and China were both in relative autarky. By 2007, India’s GDP had almost doubled, but China’s increased seven-fold. How could the largest autocratic nation is the world have a better-growing economy than one of the world’s leading democratic forces? In poor countries, democratic systems have failed in boosting economic growth over and over in countries like Venezuela. Even though the relationship between democracy and economic growth looks brilliant on paper, eventually, we have to let the numbers speak. Thailand, a nation of boasted educated middle class, one of the best-performing economies in the world, and a relatively robust civil society, was once a world economic leader and an example of social and industrial prosperity. Years after its democratizing, Thailand looks less like a success story and more like an example of how democracy can fail.
This chapter of the research is dedicated to presenting the review of the related literature, which will be helpful in establishing conceptual and theoretical-framework pertinent to the study. Thus, this portion of the research will bring out the meaning of good governance by summarizing what has been said by different scholars’, international organizations as well as aid agencies. The attributes/elements of good governance which were defined by UNDP and AfDB will be presented separately. In line with this, the major dimensions of good governance, elements of good urban governance with their detail will be summarized which will be helpful in analyzing good governance at local level.