Reflections: Governance to Drive Development in ASEAN Countries

by Dondon Parafina

It feels good and very fulfilling when you return from a mission with a very tangible take-away. In the case of my recently concluded Jakarta trip, my take-away was a book and, less tangible but equally important, the insights it gave me about our regional work in East Asia.

While on the plane, I read and finished the book I got from a meeting with the ASEAN Secretariat. Entitled "Narrowing the Development Gap in ASEAN: Driver and Policy Options", by Mark McGillivray and David Carpenter. The book presents a clear picture of where the countries are in various aspects of development and how they, together as a region, can help each other achieve inclusive development.

Even for people who are not familiar with ASEAN, the book is informative and eye-opening. It allows one to take a regional view and go beyond individual country concerns. It clearly articulates – in practical terms – the regional development discourse of ASEAN and points to sensible policy options.

Comparing governance assessment frameworks and methodologies: Lessons for developing a social accountability (SAc) index

by Randee C. Cabaces and Aldrich Telebrico
ANSA–EAP Research Team

Part 1 of 2

We recently did a review of some governance indexes and social accountability assessment frameworks.  Apart from those that we were more familiar with, like World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI), Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), and Global Integrity’s Global Integrity Report (GIR), we randomly selected those that came out of a cursory online search and which we deemed would have some interesting lessons for us in terms of developing ANSA-EAP’s own social accountability (SAc) monitoring and measurement tool.

Out of the ten (10) indexes and assessment frameworks that we examined, four (4) were global in scope, proposing some measures for governance quality that were supposed to be applicable across countries and regions.  One (1), the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG), provided a regional assessment framework for African countries.  Two (2) outlined a national framework for comparing governance quality across component provinces and municipalities.  Three (3) of the assessment tools were primarily meant for application at the local level.

A “Formula” to Describe Social Accountability

By Gladys Honey Selosa

SOMETIMES THE BETTER way of explaining a difficult concept is to frame it as a pseudo mathematical formula—a metaphorical equation, if you like, that breaks down the core elements of the concept and shows how they relate with each other.

I thought I would try this with social accountability through the following formula:

SAc Formula

 

G       =       Quality of Governance (G>1, good governance, low or no corruption; G<1=bad governance, high corruption)

T       =       Transparency

A       =       Accountability

P       =       Participation

SAc   =       Social Accountability

C       =       Corruption (corruption ≥ 1)