Friday, July 23, 2010


Recently the terms “governance” and “good governance” are being increasingly used in development literature. Bad governance is being increasingly regarded as one of the root causes of all evil within our societies. Major donors and international financial institutions are increasingly basing their aid and loans on the condition that reforms that ensure “good governance” are undertaken.

This article tries to explain, as simply as possible, what “governance” and “good governance” means.


The concept of “governance “ is not new. It is as old as human civilization, simply put “governance” means: the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented). Governance can be used in several contexts such as corporate governance, international governance, national governance and local governance.

Since governance is the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented, an analysis of governance focuses on the formal and informal actors involved in decision-making and implementing the decisions made and the formal and informal structures that have been set in place to arrive at and implement the decision.

Government is one of the actors in governance. Other actors involved in governance vary depending on the level of government that is under discussion. In rural areas, for example, other actors may include influential land lords, associations of peasant farmers, cooperatives, NGOs, research institutes, religious leaders, finance institutions political parties, the military etc. The situation in urban areas is much more complex. Figure 1 provides the interconnections between actors involved in urban governance. At the national level, in addition to the above actors, media, lobbyists, international donors, multi-national corporations, etc. may play a role in decision-making or in influencing the decision-making process.

All actors other than government and the military are grouped together as part of the “civil society”. In some countries in addition to the civil society, organized crime syndicates also influence decision-making, particularly in urban areas and at the national level.

Similarly formal government structures are one means by which decisions are arrived at and implemented. At the national level, informal decision-making structures, such as “kitchen cabinets” or informal advisors may exist. In urban areas, organized crime syndicates such as the “land Mafia” may influence decision-making. In some rural areas
Locally powerful families may make or influence decision-making. Such, informal decision-making is often the result of corrupt practices or leads to corrupt practices.


Good governance has 8 major characteristics. It is participatory, consensus oriented, accountable, transparent, responsive, effective and efficient, equitable and inclusive and follows the rule of law. It assures that corruption is minimized, the views of minorities are taken into account and that the voices of the most vulnerable in society are heard in decision-making. It is also responsive to the present and future needs of society.


Participation by both men and women is a key cornerstone of good governance. Participation could be either direct or through legitimate intermediate institutions or representatives. It is important to point out that representative democracy does not necessarily mean that the concerns of the most vulnerable in society would be taken into consideration in decision-making. Participation needs to be informed and organized. This means freedom of association and expression on the one hand and an organized civil society on the other hand.

Rule of law

Good governance requires fair legal frameworks that are enforced impartially. It also requires full protection of human rights, particularly those of minorities. Impartial enforcement of laws requires an independent judiciary and an impartial and incorruptible police force.


Transparency means that decisions taken and their enforcement are done in a manner that follows rules and regulations. It also means that information is freely available and directly accessible to those who will be affected by such decisions and their enforcement it also means that enough information is provided and that it is provided in easily understandable forms and media.


Good governance requires that institutions and processes try to serve all stakeholders within a reasonable timeframe.

Consensus oriented

There are several actors and as many view points in a given society. Good governance requires mediation of the different interests in society to reach a broad consensus in society on what is in the best interest of the whole community and how this can be achieved. It also requires a broad and long-term perspective on what is needed for sustainable human development and how to achieve the goals of such development. This can only result from an understanding of the historical, cultural and social contexts of a given society or community.

Equity and inclusiveness

A society’s well being depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they have a stake in it and do not feel excluded from the mainstream of society. This requires all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to improve or maintain their well being.

Effectiveness and efficiency

Good governance means that processes and institutions produce results that meet the needs of society while making the best use of resources at their disposal. The concept of efficiency in the context of good governance also covers the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of the environment.


Accountability is a key requirement of good governance. Not only governmental institutions but also the private sector and civil society organizations must be accountable to the public and to their institutional stakeholders. Who is accountable to whom varies depending on whether decisions or actions taken are internal or external to an organization or institution. In general an organization or an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law.


From the above discussion it should be clear that good governance is an ideal which is difficult to achieve in its totality. However, to ensure sustainable human development, actions must be taken to work towards this ideal with the aim of making it a reality.


Awareness of the problem of corruption is growing in Uganda. The desire to curb the cancer appears to be high among government but also civil society. Although the Government has put in place various institutions, policies and laws to combat corruption, there is recognition of the need for a broadly based anti-corruption policy if it is to gain support and succeed. It is pertinent to note that the efforts of Government alone are not enough to fight corruption, given the immensity of the work involved and the many challenges that continue to be posed by corruption. One of the priorities for the Government is to create an enabling environment in which a strong CSO would be capable of monitoring Government and holding it accountable. To achieve this, The Government has worked with CSO to develop effective strategies and plans to strengthen their relationship.

• Strategic plan
• Calendar year of government / CSO-
• Government to involve the CSO in planning
• Reporting to government-method of reporting
• Status of collaboration/management within CSO
• Recognition of CSO partnership role
• Policy formulation although the consultation was inadequate
• Anticorruption week
• Capacity building
• PPDA training
1. Communication/information/ sharing issues
• Limited awareness of the collaboration framework
• Dissemination mechanism
• Inadequate reporting
• Limited resources
• Communication channels
2. Representation ad ownership of the process
• Low commitment to the collaboration activities
• Limited membership of the steering committee
• Key players are not active i.e. IGG
• Confidence building and restoring credibility of ACCU
• Special consultation forum by Government for the anti corruption CSO
3. Institutional issues
• Informal collaboration arrangement not institutional, it depends with an individual
• How is the national level collaboration translated into local level action while keeping the national level issues relevant?
4. Legislation issues
• Gaps in the legislation
• Slow process in the enactment of protective laws
• Forum
• Strong Government will
• Donor support
• Expertise within the CSO
• Legal framework
• Potential conflict of interest
• Funding
• Lack of support from the local government authorities
• Unhealthy competition among the CSO
• Most CSO are not transparent
• Poor communication
a) How do CSOs organize themselves to achieve cohesion, coordinate better, share information and speak with one voice? (Representation, relevance, coordination)

• Clarity of purpose and mandate
• Creating one coordinating unit and joint reporting
• Expanding the steering committee
• Developing cooperation agreements between CSO
• Establish one coordinating center at regional level
• Common needs assessment to have a common ground
• Need to know the location of each other
• Shared values as CSO and put them in practice(responsibility, transparency e.t.c
• Identify common agenda for coordination purpose
• A two way effective and timely communication among the members
• Formulate clear principles, terms of reference
• Team work
• Transparency and accountability

b) How would CSO effectively collaborate with government?
• having joint forums to discuss anti corruption issues
• Joint reporting mechanism
• Joint resource mobilization
• Enhance mutual respect and transparency
• Have regional coalition and elect a representative at the steering committee
• Increase the number of representative
• Members of steering committee needs training
• Regular steering committee meetings and feedbacks
• Two way communication
• Sufficient facts on issues at hand

Capacity building
-Sharing of technical/expertise assistance
-Civil education (sensitization of anti corruption laws)
-Organize regional workshops on national values
-mobilization/campaign skills to improve communication
-Proper presentation
-Common consultative programme
-Anti corruption week
-Attending steering committee
-Policy and legislative reviews
-Advocating for new anti corruption laws
-monitoring policy implementation
-Organizing workshops at CSO expenses
Lobby parliamentarians

-Sharing research findings
-On topical issues
-Source for funding of the research
-Monitoring and evaluation

Recommendations/way forward
1. Separate internal and inter organizational issues
2. CSO to be exemplary in their work
3. Improve on communication
4. Conduct needs assessment on capacity building of all the members
5. media campaign
6. organizational assessment
7. I.E.C strategies

Capacity building needs

• Lack of effective networking
• Inadequate resources
• Lack of appropriate infrastructure
• Inadequate skills
• Ineffective link with the media
• Research
• Strategic planning

• Mailing list
• Effective communication strategies
• Continuous sensitization of the member organization
• Commitment of the member to network
• Training
• Quality of service
• Joint soliciting of funds
• Promoting public /private partnership

Role of key stakeholders in capacity building
• Needs assessment
• Identify the expertise within the members
• Government enact enabling laws and support CSOs
• CSOs lobby and advocate for issues
• Donors provide financial support
• Legal status
• Office equipment
• Human resource
• Finance
• Training
• Media linkages
Factors of success
• Good working relationship
• Good working environment
• Political will

No comments: