Principles and characteristics of good governance – 2
I recently wrote about ‘The eight principles and characteristics of good governance’. To my surprise, I received more than normal feedback from readers wanting to know the quantitative assessment (scoring) for each of the characteristics.
The correct method would, of course, be to collect the data from randomly-selected respondents across the country: something like 10 persons from each administrative region. This is how a proper survey should preferably be done; but, I must confess I am in no position logistically to undertake such surveying.
In this piece today, I have scored for each characteristic. M readers can do the same – and compare theirs with my scoring system. Some will agree, while others may not – since there is a lot of subjectivity. But the ‘take-away’ message is that: in low scoring characteristics, there is a dire need to bring about improvements.
For each characteristic, the maximum score is ten (10). The higher the score, the better the achievement.
1. Participation: Generally, the level of participation by citizens in development issues is very high; no section of the population is restricted or suppressed in the development agenda, and everyone can participate. But, there are gaps and freedom of expression in the political arena. Today, opposition parties are not allowed to gather together or have public meetings – and, to a certain degree, the press is restricted. If improvements are made in this two areas, Tanzania will score almost 9 out of 10. But for the time being, I give it a score of 7.
2. Rule of law: Generally, Tanzania is a peaceful country compared to many countries of the world. There is security of property and, to a very high degree, most Tanzanians sleep in safety. However, unexplained and/or unresolved abductions of innocent citizens; daylight shooting of a member of Parliament; proclamations by senior government leaders that there should be no discussions on certain topics, and spontaneous delivery of directives in public meetings by regional and district administrative nabobs is all compromised the rule of law. For this, I give a score of 5.5 out of 10.
3. Transparency: There is definitely improvement in transparency. As part of overall discipline in the performance of civil servants, people are able to get the appropriate information they need. However, there is still much to be done to improve Transparency. I give a score of 7.5 to Transparency.
4. Responsiveness: This requires that the government and its systems and processes are intended to serve the best interests of citizens within reasonable time frames. Again this characteristic has improved considerably – and I give it a score of 7.5.
5. Consensus-oriented: This requires consultation to understand the different interests of Tanzanians in order to reach a broad consensus of what is in the best interests of the entire population – and how this can be achieved in a prudent and sustainable manner. Again this characteristic has improved considerably, and I give it a score of 7.5
6. Equity and inclusiveness: A government that provides the opportunity for its citizens to maintain, enhance and generally improve their wellbeing also provides the most compelling message regarding the reason for its existence and value to its society. To be honest, I think the current administration of President John Magufuli has done very well here – thus scoring 8!
7. Effectiveness and efficiency: Good governance means that the processes implemented by the government to produce favorable results meet the needs of its citizens, while making the best use of the human, technological, financial, natural and environmental resources at its disposal. I also give this a score of 8.
8. Accountability: Accountability is a key tenet of good governance. Who is accountable for what should be documented in official statements. In general, a government is accountable to those who are affected by its decisions, actions and the applicable regulatory frameworks. For this, I give a score of 8.
As per my scoring above, I have given a score of 74 per cent for overall governance. As mentioned earlier that this is highly subjective, and people may not agree with me. One point that they may arguably agree with me – including the current leadership – is that there is no way that a score of 100 per cent can be given.
If some form of scoring is done for Development, I think the current administration would definitely score higher.
This means that there is a gap between Development and Good Governance. This is not a good indication and, therefore, it tis the onus of those in power and authority to narrow the gap.
There indeed should be proportionality between development and good governance… Otherwise, what we see as ‘development’ today will not be sustainable.
