Talk:Governance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
What about integrating recent highlighting of governance in policies of multilateral development organizations such as the World Bank? In recent years, these organizations have moved from concentration on structural adjustment to concentration on governance, or institutional reform, as necessary for economic development.
--Imagine&Engage 12:24, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
Although the page does read better than it did I am concerned about an inconsistency in the position being presented. When I edited the page I was hoping to bring out the distinction between ‘government’ and ‘governance’ in terms of the traditional form of ‘government’ being but one form of ‘governance’. Now the article begins with an understanding of governance as ’administration’ that is in line with the ’World Bank’ definition and traditional ‘government’ but sharply out of line with the second more adequate definition. I think in contemporary thinking on governance the broader definition should apply where ’governance’ includes the three modes of governance as a response to perceived limitations of the modern state as identified by Foucault. The current position appears to suggest both that ’governance’ is merely ‘administration’ which is harmonious to traditional forms of ’government’. This position misses the central point of the turn to ’governance’ that includes, for example, ‘networks‘. This suggests that any attempt to distinguish between ‘administration’ and ‘politics’, ’governance’ and ’government’ is a dangerous illusion. What do others think. Should it be changed to present a consistent position or left?
- Go ahead and make changes . You seem to have quite a bit of knowledge on the subject , so cite sources wherever possible eg You mention Foucault above but not in the article. Lumos3 09:44, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
