L6 - why good policies aren't being implemented Flashcards
what explains why some places are more developed than others?
-review
so far:
- institutional rules (economic and poltical) create incentives for development
- formal rules are often not enforced in practice due to a weak or predatory state or unhelpful informal institutions
- in turn produced by history and geography
how do we promote development?
-review
- more inclusive formal institutions (laws protecting rights to encourage investment)
- more supportive informal institutions (norms that encourage enforcement and compliance)
- increase trust, nationalism (build a common identity) - more centralized, capable states, with embedded autonomy
“good governance” = ensuring respect for human rights and the rule of law; strengthening democracy; promoting transparency and capacity in public administration
-> is not very effective
review - most dev agencies try to promote good governance:
- participation
- rule of law
- consensus
- equity and inclusiveness
- effectiveness and efficiency
- accountability
- transparency
- responsiveness
why good policies aren’t being implemented
4
conclusion
- Failing Development Policies
- a modern consensus on ‘good governance’ to raise institutional strength
- but development projects are still systematically failing to be implemented
- one reason: the rules are ignored by politicians - ‘Good governance’ is too demanding
- lack of time and capacity to implement hundreds of reforms
- some are urgent, others often follow development - Form prioritized over Function
- copying ‘modern’ western ‘succesful’ institutions is easier than risky local experimentation
- donors often reward form - Non-implementation wins vote
- forbearance is a cheap means of redistribution
- where politicians represent the poor and social welfare is absent
why good policies aren’t being implemented
- failing development policies
promoting good governance is a slow process (at current rate of development places are developing over 100s years or even moving backward)
+ there is a capability trap
lack of knowledge about ‘best practice’ policies is not the problem:
- donors spend billions on ‘transplanted best practice’
(e.g. IT equipment unused in Nigerian Ministry) - even when countries adopt good governance policies, implementation is poor
(e.g. 48% teacher absences in India (no improvement despite massive investment))(e.g. Mozambique has ‘best practice’ budget process but off-the-boks debt)
why good policies aren’t being implemented
- failing development policies
Nigeria’s Vision 2020
development strategy from 2009 to 2020 that tried to promote good governance
- increased investment in critical infrastructure
- establish general hospital in each of 774 local governments
- enforce a mandatory nine-year universal basic education program
- entrenchment of merit as a fundamental principle
- strengthening the anti-corruption institutions, especially in autonomy
tried to address constraints of history of geography:
- diversification away from oil
- upgrading the capability of the internal security apparatus of government
- promote unity in diversity, national pride
- enforcement of a code of values and ethics for public servants
many implementing organizations
outcome: more corrupt, GP increased but not as much as aimed + power generation not big power generation increase as wanted + 3% rather than 40% increase literacy rates (100% aimed for is impossible: old illiterates still alive)
!not lack of knowledge of resources that made it fail -> problem was even with good governance it did not work
why are development initiatives still failing
rules are being
- ignored (by politicians)
- good governance is too demanding
- form is prioritized over function (‘isomorphic mimicry’)
- not enforcing wins votes (‘forbearance’ - imported (by international donors)
- broken (by corruption and clientelism)
- resisted (by vested interests and identities)
why good policies aren’t being implemented
good governance is too demanding
good governance policies are OVERWHELMING
- agenda defined by WB, IMF, and western donors
- 116 items by 2002
- Just ‘govern like you were Denmark’
- reforms make sense on their own: inclusive institutions, good informal institutions, etc. but when taken together the list is enormous
things like: gender equality, land reform, transparency, climate change adaptation, anti-corruption, labour rights, biodiversity
- developed countries also struggle with some of these, e.g. climate change adaptation
improving governance is hard bc:
- limited time, attention and political capital
- ‘premature load bearing’
- capacity by definition limited in developing countries
- doing everything means doing nothing - organizations are ‘stressed’ - these governance institutions are the result, not the cause of development
- now-developed countries did not have all these institutions and capabilities when they grew
- good governance followed development, once it could be afforded
why good policies aren’t being implemented
good governance is too demanding -> Grindle’s suggestion:
GOOD ENOUGH GOVERNANCE
(not really clear about what it means + why these elements)
- prioritize crucial reforms
- understand the optimal sequencing
- prioritize poverty reduction
(not how it happened in the West)
but:
- is this compatible with Sen’s argument that all freedoms are important and complementary?
- is short term poverty reduction historically how countries developed?
- shouldn’t countries be allowed to prioritize themselves
why good policies aren’t being implemented
form prioritized over function
- definition isomorphic mimicry
= copy pasting institutional rules that are perceived to have promoted development elsewhere
(e.g. Nigerian constitution modeled after the US constitution)
an institutional form (what it looks like) is not its function (what it does)
-> reform without real development
= logic of modernization theory: copying ‘modern’ organizational forms creates development
BUT:
- assumes that institutions work the same in any context
- ignores differences in history, culture, state capacity (e.g. if you have problem of the effects of slavery and you are copying from a country that had never had that problem it is not very useful)
- ignores how the institutions came to be and how state capabilities are built by learning and doing
- ignores local legitimacy of the institution
- ignores whether these institutions really mattered for development
why does isomorphic mimicry continue?
- Importing ‘Western’ institutions provides domestic legitimacy to bureaucrats and politicians
- It ‘must’ work because the West is already rich
- An alternative to ‘performance’ legitimacy
- A ‘window dressing’ institution: makes you look like you did a good jobb
- it is the simple thing to do
- you took the best option, so if it doesn’t work it’s not your best, you did the best option (while actually you could have innovated, come up with your own solutions)
- there is a logic to this
- Western donors have a bias to export ‘modern’, technical solutions
- ‘Technical assistance’ missions are less controversial than ‘political’ missions (politically complicated process can invoke resistance, if it is technical assistance, it is less contentious)
- Local experimentation is risky and hard to evaluate
- Copying British laws suggests Britain is influential
- A development ‘industry’, not development
- they feel like they are experts = technical problems
form prioritized over function - Nigeria Vision 2020
Nigeria’s Vision 2020 explicitly sought to mimic Singapore
- Defined accountability relationships
- ‘Scorecard’: copy Singapore rules
- ‘Key performance indicators’
- ‘National performance report’
Bureaucrats’ goals become ‘create key performance indicators’
NOT ‘develop the country’
looking outside, not inside to resolve your own problems
e.g. form prioritized over function
monitoring and evaluation fail to get teachers to turn up to school India
- qualified teachers only live in urban areas
- they are employed at distant rural schools
- public transportation is unreliable
- urban childcare and schools are often closed
- teachers jobs are protected by politically powerful unions
why good policies aren’t being implemented
- not enforcing wins votes
why aren’t the police arresting people breaking the law?
street vendors
not about institutional rules
- this is unambiguously illegal
not about capacity
- enforcement happens sometimes but not at other times (Colombia)
- strong states sometimes don’t enforce (Chile)
not about corruption
- these streets sellers don’t need to pay police to look the other way (they are told by their superiors to do so)
-> forbearance: intentionally choosing not to enforce the rules/laws
forbearance
intentionally choosing not to enforce the rules/laws
why good policies aren’t being implemented
- not enforcing wins votes
institutional rules provide incentives for investments
but they also redistribute wealth and opportunities
- e.g. banning street sellers redistributes wealth from informal sellers to formal shops
- providing property rights protection for shop owners and ‘order’
ignoring those rules can redistribute large benefits to the poor
(redistribution without taxation)
- more than the value of direct government benefits
the cost: undermining property rights
- reducing incentives to invest
- for shopowners
- for informal sellers
politics in developing countries is not left vs right -> it is enforcement vs forbearance
enforcement is a signal of being ‘anti-poor’ (a candidate of ‘law and order’)
forbearance is a signal of being pro-poor
when do governments choose forbearance and enforcement?
forbearance:
- where governing politicians depend on poor voters
- where alternative, formal, social welfare programs are weak
- e.g. Peru, Bogota, Colombia after 2003
enforcement:
- where politicians depend on middle-class voters and shopkeepers
- and can claim credit for solving social problems like congestion and crime
- some politicians try to build a reputation of reforming, of strictly enforcing, stopping informal selling, stopping crime -> giving it order
- e.g. Oshodi Market, Lagos, Nigeria
are politicians that use forbearance advancing development or blocking it?
advancing:
they are in the informal sector bc they don’t have an alternative -> if you enforce they will fall into deep poverty
blocking:
no incentive to invest:
- informal sellers don’t have much, can’t invest in making a more proper shop bc then they can’t run when the police come + it will be stolen
- the shop may want to put advertising or some cafe outside, but they can’t do it bc informal sellers are blocking their property
= trade-off between short-term benefits street sellers and long-term benefits of incentivizing development
