Governance and development
The ranking of the Philippines in the Chandler Good Government Index and the individual pillars would not be surprising to those who know what is happening in the country
Daily TribuneThe ranking of the Philippines in the Chandler Good Government Index and the individual pillars would not be surprising to those who know what is happening in the country
The World Bank defines governance as the method by which power is exercised in managing a country's political, economic, and social resources for development. The International Centre for Parliamentary Studies, for its part, views good governance as being essential for economic development and poverty alleviation.
It is thus concerning that this year, the Philippines fell three places in an annual governance index, placing 66th out of 104 countries assessed.
Singapore topped the list of best-governed countries, followed by Switzerland, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, Germany, the United Kingdom and New Zealand.
Rounding off the top 20 were Ireland, Austria, Japan, United States, Canada, France and Australia (tied), South Korea and Estonia (tied), and the United Arab Emirates.
The Chandler Institute of Governance, which carries out this assessment, has seven pillars for its good government index — Leadership and Foresight, Robust Laws and Policies, Strong Institutions, Financial Stewardship, Attractive Marketplace, Global Influence and Reputation, and Helping People Rise.
In Leadership and Foresight (ethical leadership, long-term vision, adaptability, strategic prioritization, and innovation), the Philippines ranked 69th out of the 104 countries assessed.
In Robust Laws and Policies (the rule of law, quality of judiciary, transparency, regulatory governance), the Philippines was 70th.
In Strong Institutions (coordination, data capability, implementation, quality of bureaucracy), it was 59th.
In Financial Stewardship (government debt, country budget surplus, spending efficiency, country risk premium), it ranked 41.
In Attractive Marketplace (property rights, macroeconomic environment, attracting investments, logistics competence, stable business regulations), the country placed 58.
In Global Influence and Reputation (international trade, international diplomacy, nation brand, passport strength), it was ranked 68th.
In Helping People Rise (education, health, satisfaction with public services, personal safety, environmental performance, income equality, gender gap, social mobility, non-discrimination), the country was 65th.
Of the five original members of the ASEAN, the Philippines scored the lowest in this governance assessment. As stated earlier, Singapore ranked No. 1. Malaysia was No. 33, Indonesia 46, and Thailand 47. Even Vietnam, which achieved peace only in 1975 and joined the ASEAN in 1995, ranked 49th. The Philippines did better only against the other ASEAN country assessed, Cambodia, which placed 88th.
The ranking of the Philippines in the Chandler Good Government Index and the individual pillars would not be surprising to those who know what is happening in the country. There may be many reasons for such, but ultimately, it all boils down to governance. The quality of governance, both in the public and private sectors, but primarily in the former, is the primary factor determining a nation's growth, stagnation, or regression.
In a democracy, public sector governance is carried out by elected officials and the people they appoint. Thus, if the people elect competent and honest officials, they are expected to appoint good people to occupy public positions. Theoretically, they should enact good laws and policies and implement them well. Trustees and public servants are expected to handle public funds judiciously, provide basic services to the people, and ensure the nation's progress. However, if the people do not elect competent and honest officials, then the opposite will happen.
Power is supposed to reside in the people. If officials misbehave or do not carry out their duties as they are supposed to, then the people who placed them there are expected to remove them through the ballot or other legal means. If the people do not do so and simply let what is wrong continue to happen, then they have no one else to blame but themselves.
Good public sector governance by elected and appointed officials is the primary driver of the development of a nation. Ensuring that a nation has competent and honest officials in government is, in turn, the responsibility of the people.
