Many people have inquired about my personal approach to governance assessment when I visit different countries. I have outlined my thoughts on this topic in a new working paper, which introduces what I term an “ends-means” approach to understanding governance.
My focus on ends stems from the belief that they reflect the practical functionality and capability of states—what they are able to achieve. I believe that the current governance discourse often overlooks revealed capabilities and ends due to a bias towards discussions about form and preferred means of governance. This bias is evident in reform programs that prioritize commonly agreed-upon methods of managing public finances, structuring regulatory frameworks, procuring goods, organizing service delivery, managing civil servants, and more. While these goals are undoubtedly desirable, I question whether appearances matter as much as action, and whether they always lead to the necessary actions from governments, particularly in developing countries.
By emphasizing a form-based governance agenda, we may neglect the fundamental purpose of governments, which is to take action. Consequently, we focus on the means of governance rather than the outcomes of governance. This bias often results in governance indicators and reforms that prioritize perfecting means without clearly connecting them to ends or considering that different ends may justify different means in different contexts.
In the governance discourse, there exists a tension between ends and means, with many discussions centering on how governments should be rather than what they should do. In my paper, I advocate for prioritizing ends—what governments need to achieve for the development of their citizens—before considering means.
To provide a comprehensive understanding of governance, I identify seventy different ends and means to assess governance. However, I refrain from using standalone, all-encompassing indicators of governance, as they often fail to capture the multidimensional nature of governance or the variation in governance characteristics and performance among countries.
Instead, I propose using comparative, benchmarked dashboards and narratives to analyze governance data. These dashboards offer a visual representation of how a specific government compares with others on various ends and means, highlighting the diversity in governance characteristics and performance.
My paper serves as a personal viewpoint on an increasingly significant topic, offering a comprehensive overview of my thoughts to date. I hope to stimulate further discussion and contribute to the conversation about including governance indicators in the post-2015 development indicator framework. In the final section of the paper, I present specific ideas in this regard, building on existing contributions to the field.