Introduction

A certain level of institutionalization is required to change the reality of political systems and move from one status to another, from traditional structures to modernized structures to keep pace with the times and its requirements that push toward freedom based on free choice. This requires legal standards that govern the work of institutions away from stagnation, personalism, or domination. The existence of this standard is very important to understand the requirements and to be able to realize the expectations that the reform brings about, and without that, the political system will collapse or be unstable. It is important to take into account the material and moral requirements and needs of the social components because the political stability in the legal transition from one status to another is fundamentally linked to the concept of political legitimacy, which means the conformity of the values of the political system with the values of the people. Otherwise, what is the benefit of reform when it leads to a decline in political legitimacy, which is the case of many developing countries in general and African countries in particular.

Political reform in these regimes is necessary and an urgent matter that requires continuity and sustainability, because it is directly related to political adaptation and the assimilation of political and social changes, and it is the opposite of stagnation, as stagnated regimes that cannot adapt are the fastest to fall. Change is the law of human societies, regardless of their degree of development or progress, and its reasons are always present.

The use of the concept of good governance has escalated in recent years in the Arab world and Africa, affected by the liberal Western culture, from which several terms emerged, including: Governance management, proper governance, righteous governance, good governance, governance, governing. All these terms refer to the same concept.

However, this issue particularly raised many questions and important critical remarks about the concept, in terms of its content and indicators. Despite acknowledging the importance of participation, accountability, transparency, and other principles of good governance, the is considerable ambiguity in the methods of practice and application, which draws attention to the need to clarify the specific meanings of these concepts in accordance with the African context. In general, many African analysts believe that all of these principles should be considered as development goals in themselves. Thus, the question raised here is:

• Can the term good governance be accepted and used?

• Or it must be rejected both in form and in substance and use alternative terms in order to achieve comprehensive development and correspond to the African context?

• Addressing this issue required testing a set of scientific hypotheses as follows:

• There is a relationship between the crisis of disengagement between the state and society and the failure of attempts to reform political systems.

• There is a close link between the institutional failure of the state and the inability to implement the principles of good governance.

• The higher the levels of political culture, the greater the chances of responding to societal requirements and needs.

1. A conceptual and theoretical introduction to good governance and responsive governance.

1.1. The concept of good governance

The concept of governance is considered one of the most widely circulated social and political concepts, regardless of the angles from which this concept is approached or the state discussed. This concept is originally neutral, as it expresses the exercise of political power and its management of society’s affairs, resources, and economic and social development.

It is understood that the governance concept is broader than the government concept because, in addition to the functions performed by the official state bodies and the practices of the executive, legislative and judicial authority, it includes the functions of all informal institutions and everything that civil society organizations do. It also includes the private sector. Many United Nations organizations have adopted a definition of governance as managing the exercise of political, economic, and social authority at all levels, central, decentralized, regional, and local.

As for the concept that linked the “good” or “righteous” to governance, it was used in the process of evaluating the practice of authorities in states, in terms of managing the affairs of societies towards their development, and progress. Thus, “righteous governance” or “good governance” is defined as the rule adopted by legitimate political leaders, i. e., elected fairly and freely. These leaders are administrative cadres who are committed to developing the resources of society and are keen to improve the quality of life and well-being of citizens, with mutual trust and satisfaction between them and the nationals, on the basis of the partnership between them.

The United Nations Development Program in 1997 defined good governance as: The exercise of economic, political, and administrative authority to manage a country’s affairs at all levels. It comprises mechanisms, processes, and institutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal rights, meet their obligations, and mediate their differences. Good governance works on allocating wealth and using it to meet collective needs. It is characterized by participation, transparency, accountability, rule of law, effectiveness, and equality.

Good governance is also defined as the rule that promotes and supports the continuation of human goodness, based on deploying human capabilities, choices, opportunities, and political, economic, and social freedom. (علوي أ.، 2010)

Bert A. Rockman and Joel D. Aberbach set four criteria for assessing the quality and effectiveness of governance:

• The government’s ability to obtain the necessary information.

• The degree of implications on the decisions it makes.

• The nature of the relationship between the government and its institutions on the one hand, and interest groups and societal forces on the other.

• The extent to which the government is able to implement its decisions effectively.

The World Bank developed a two-way strategy to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of the state, as follows:

1. Matching the state’s role to its capacities, i. e., it should determine the various areas in which it intervenes according to the limits of its actual capacity and not go beyond that to bear more than its actual capacity.

2. Reinvigorating and revitalizing public institutions’ work and performance, abolishing administrative ineffectiveness, combating corruption, enhancing participation and decision-making mechanisms, and expanding powers towards decentralization in those institutions. (علوي أ.، 2010، الصفحات 56-57)

1.2. The concept of responsive governance

Building responsive states is an example of how to build a capable, accountable, and responsive state. It includes three key areas of progress: Political settlement, survival functions, and expected functions.

1. Political settlement: Comparative political scientists prefer using the term “elites’ settlement”, by emphasizing the importance of persuading the elites to end the conflict and coexist peacefully. State building is an iterative process formed through the interaction of elites according to the nature of the relationship between the state and society.

2. Survival functions: The second area of progress for responsive state-building is a set of core functions essential to the survival and strength of the institutional framework of the state (e.g., addressing humanitarian crises). All responsive state-building processes must have the capacity for three essential functions:

• Security (to be able to control, if not monopolize, the use of violence), revenue, and law (the capability to rule through laws; and to be seen to do this). Achieving competence in these areas is necessary but not sufficient for the process of responsive state-building.

• Expected functions: The third area of essential progress is the achievement of an ’expected’ level of functionality; i. e., the responsive state must have the ability to fulfill public expectations, especially in social and economic issues. (جيلالي، 2014، صفحة 102)

• Levels of performance will vary due to the level of capacity, and the nature of expectations will vary from state to state.

2. A Critical Reading of Good Governance Concept from An African Perspective

One of the most important comments raised regarding the concept of good governance is that its context and use contradict the primacy of the political dimensions in the development process in the continent. For Claudio Chauftin, for example, the problem of development in Africa is related to power (i. e., neglecting the political dimensions of development) and justice (i. e., neglecting the issue of distributive justice). In addition to Adebayo Olukoshi, many analysts such as Claude Ake, Thandika Mkandawire, Ernest Ambadiaouamba, Mahmoud Mamdani, and others have emphasized the centrality of the political dimensions in the African development crisis. Olukoshi believes that the development framework for Africa should not subject these dimensions to neo-liberal economic policies, but rather it must make popular participation in processes and policies a key priority, which brings us back once again to the priority of popular participation in good governance in Africa. The analyses, which emphasized that the crisis of governance and development in Africa is related to political leadership, are linked to the political diagnosis and treatment of good governance in Africa. In Korwa Adar’s point of view, for example, leadership is one of the important elements that must be given attention in order to achieve good governance. This requires, according to him, the establishment of constitutional restrictions and mechanisms for balancing between powers and setting limited terms for the presidency besides other measures that ensure non-monopoly of power. (شوفتان، 1998، صفحة 7)

For Paul Nkwi, the problem of good governance is linked to the culture of political leadership in many countries of the continent. In some of these countries, leaders may accede to power illegally, and seek to establish mock institutions to legitimize their rule, which affects good governance in those countries, and this is what creates the governance crisis in Africa. From the point of view of the Kenyan analyst Eric Asika, good governance crisis in Africa is a leadership crisis that lacks the culture of transparency and accountability. (Wall, 1997: 66) It is noticeable after putting forward these comments that they sometimes clearly differ with the view of some Western writings with liberal nature on good governance in the continent, which often consider that the absence of good governance in Africa is due to the nature of those systems that impede the application of its principles.

Michael Bratton, Nicholas Van De Wall, and Goran Haden, followed by many analyses, proposed that neopaternalism in Africa is a major obstacle to achieving good governance. From this logic, they considered that the principles of good governance as in the Western perception are not easy to be applied to the African reality. The neopaternalism is characterized by weak accountability, reliance on standards of loyalty and trust, reliance on the zero-sum game policy, and personal rule, making it difficult to talk about the principles of accountability, participation, and transparency. This paternalism has made the governments of African countries, according to Haden, not concerned with the implementation and application of policies, but rather clientelist governments that depend on personal criteria in distribution. In this context, accountability becomes limited within the scope of these personal relationships, and citizens become merely submissive, which contradicts the principle of participation and the consolidation of human rights, making violating these rights in some African countries easy. These analyses go beyond that as they think that since African governments are clientelist and not concerned with making or implementing policies, they have left the responsibility of making these policies to the international institutions. According to these analyses, the reason behind the failure of African governments to design their own reform programs, and their rejection of the adjustment programs made by the international institutions, was not fear of their impact on the poor, but their unwillingness to apply the principles of accountability and transparency that place restrictions on their authority, as these structural adjustment programs would be enough to limit their authorities. (Hyden, 1998: 37-42)

Thus, according to these analyses, they gave particularity to principles of accountability and responsibility. So, they had a special African character as a result of the institutional nature of clientelist policies. (Hyden, 1998: p. 42) Said Adejumobi summarized the criticisms of the good governance concept by concluding that this concept, in short, seeks to support a market economy, in which the majority of the population of African countries - especially the rural population - is not an essential component meanwhile the focus of good governance theories on civil society are based on urban bases and the weak private sector in Africa. (توفيق، 2005، الصفحات 148-149) Although the contribution of some African analysts was limited to criticizing the theories of good governance, some tried to provide alternatives to these theories, some of which propose a set of general principles that should govern reform frameworks in the continent countries, and others propose a specific development formula that draws a specific role for the state.

Ali Mazrui, for example, suggested the foundations of governance that the continent should strive to achieve. The formula of economic and political reform adopted by African countries, or what “Mazrui” calls “Afrostroika”, has taken different forms and dimensions, and thus different results. However, in his point of view, the relationship of good governance with development and the role of the state includes several dimensions: the size of the state (i. e., the size of its bureaucracies and public sector), the role or functions of the state, the competence or capability of the state to carry out these functions, and its fulfillment of the demands of people (which is related to legitimacy). The real crisis of governance in Africa, in Mazrui’s point of view, is the failure to reach a formula in which the previously-mentioned dimensions contribute to achieving a balance between:

• Authoritarianism (the state’s monopolization of political power), and chaos (weakness and decline of the state to the point of collapse sometimes). Some African countries including Angola, Mozambique, and Liberia have experienced the two phenomena without being able to balance them during the civil war.

• Economic dependency (lack of ability to rely on oneself), and economic collapse (disability to achieve development). Therefore, the challenge facing the African state is to reach a formula for governance or political engineering that achieves this balance that many African countries lack. (Mazrui, 1996pp.: 89-90)

Tokombe Lumuamba Kasongo believes that the African state is an essential actor in achieving development. However, in its current form, it cannot be an engine for achieving development due to the privatization it experienced, and its conservative elitist nature that reflects a hierarchical structure through which the serves the interests of the minority, while the majority suffers from deprivation of their rights and is unable to formulate a comprehensive program for development. (كاسونجو، 2003، صفحة 149).

Therefore, Kasongo proposes democratic socialism as a model that the African state can benefit from in redefining and formulating the concept of the state; It is a model suitable for African society, which is characterized by a sense of community, unlike the individual liberal model of development, and depends on a strong state that is able to intervene in favor of the poor groups and has legitimacy. (Mazrui، 1996، صفحة 90)

In addition, there is literature that discussed the possibility of establishing a democratic developmental state in Africa. Foremost among this literature are the writings of “Thandika Mkandawire” who supports such pattern and believes in the possibility of its existence in the continent. He also refutes all statements that see otherwise. According to Mkandawire, the issue goes beyond merely supporting and improving the state’s technical efficiency, to the need for social, democratic, and developmental institutions in the African state that provide a decision-making system in which the main actors have an open space for debate to design reform plans and programs. Omandoadedeji sees that such literature focuses more on the role that the state should play or the goals it should pursue than on the means of achieving this role or those goals or analyzing the reasons for failure in achieving them. (كاسونجو، 2003، صفحة 150)

3. Good Governance in the African Context and Proposed Alternatives (Towards Responsive Governance in Africa)

Regarding the priority of indicators of good governance in the African context, it should be noted that the matter is not only about what the indicators of this concept are but also the priority of indicators over others. Many analyses agree that the elements of comprehensive popular participation, which achieve a balance between different ethnic and racial groups, and justice and social welfare are essential elements of good governance that are required to be achieved in the continent. This is evident in the alternatives suggested by these analysts to the concept of “good governance”. For Stephen Friedman, “responsive governance” for individuals’ requirements is the basis for good governance in the continent. Said Adejumobi emphasized on that stressing the fact that good governance is not in its indicators but rather in its results. If governance supports the economic welfare of individuals, then it becomes good governance. Likewise, good governance, according to Lansburgh, for instance, is not just the establishment of institutions that guarantee accountability and transparency, without holding periodic elections. Despite the importance of these dimensions, the basic guarantee of democratic governance, which is Lansburgh’s alternative to the concept of good governance, is that the government exercises its authority in a way that individuals feel that they have a role in the governance process. Then, this type of governance becomes the basic guarantee for conflict prevention because exclusion, dominance, and discrimination are the real reasons behind conflicts. (Clapham, 1996 pp.: 187-188) Also, popular sovereignty, social justice, and equal access to resources are the basic elements of what Archie Mafeje called “Democratic Governance or New Democracy in Africa”. (Mafeje, Democratic Governance and New Democracy in Africa: Agenda for the Future, 2002pp.: 6-8) Claudio Schuftan emphasized the importance of popular participation in development and distinguished it from inclusion; Popular participation is based on the involvement of individuals in designing the programs aimed at them in order to integrate them into the development process. Analysts such as Stephen Gelb, Sanucha Naidu and Garth Le Pere also agreed on the same elements. (شوفتان, 1998, p. 7)

Noticeably, both radical and liberal analysts agreed on these elements. For example, the liberal analyst “Greg Mill’z” believes that the concept of good governance and the global vision of optimal policies and practices must come together with the welfare of citizens and poverty reduction. He also thinks that providing services and supporting social equality are basic functions that African governments cannot abandon, as they are basic principles for good governance in the continent. Mill’z adds to these principles the issue of maintaining security that may threaten the sustainability of the democratic process and economic growth. The latter element was the basis for the Ugandan analyst Yash Tandon’s presentation of the concept of “Efficient Governance” as a complement to good governance; He explained that there are two aspects to good governance: The first aspect is related to accountability, and the second is related to efficiency. This efficiency raises other dimensions of good governance, including the ability to maintain order, which during the crises has priority over the principle of accountability, economic growth, and the welfare of citizens.

3.1 Good Governance and the Role of African Civil Society

International institutions consider civil society an essential partner for achieving good governance, as it is the source of the values of pluralism, accountability, transparency, and the rule of law, and a basic engine for these values. It supports the role of individuals in the accountability of political and administrative officials and is a force that confronts the state. This proposition assumes that civil society will adopt a liberal framework that supports the role of the market and limits the absolute freedom of the state. So, is this proposition actually achieved in African civil society?

Although many African analysts recognize the role of civil society in achieving development and supporting the principles of good governance in the continent, they express many reservations regarding the Western vision of this role. There are quite a few civil society organizations in Africa that are not necessary, according to the analyst Yusef Banjura, “civilian”; They are not open and not based on participation as many people think, and they may reflect sectoral or classist interests or narrow ideology, not to mention the organizations that have no goal other than profit.

However, in the African context, it is necessary to take into account the state’s control over society in many African countries, and the absence of the required distance between the state and society, which was the basis for the establishment of civil society in Western societies. Also, it should be taken into consideration that most civil society organizations in these countries work in development and providing services fields, which does not necessarily put them in confrontation with the state as a parallel force.

Meanwhile, these organizations often lack coordination among each other, which does not necessarily make their activities harmonious, but sometimes reflects a degree of conflictual relationships within them and between them and the state. This made “Mahmood Mamdani” question whether African civil society actually has the capabilities and qualifications that the African state lacks to advance good governance.

Empirical research confirms such reservations, as Maria Nzomo observed the results of a research project carried out by a number of African analysts to study the contribution of some African civil society organizations in some countries to achieving the principles of good governance in the late 1990s. She concluded the following: The civil society in the 12 African countries included in the study (Mali, Senegal, Burkina Faso, Nigeria, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Malawi, Uganda, South Africa, Cameroon, Rwanda, and The Democratic Republic of the Congo) lacks sufficient capabilities to communicate among its organizations and raise awareness of the principles of good governance. It also focuses on limited development goals. Civil society organizations in North Africa do not deviate much from this framework; as the personalization of power, the militarization of politics, bureaucratic restrictions, financing problems, and the influence of political Islam movements, which characterize North African countries, are all factors that affect the effectiveness of civil society organizations. (Bangura, 1999: 12)

In Egypt, for example, some of these organizations have an influence on policy-making (the influence of businessmen’s associations on economic policy) due to their political and ideological orientations that match the state’s orientations, but these organizations mostly stay away from thorny political issues related to reform. (ابراهيم، 1992، صفحة 458)

Regardless of the reservations expressed by the previous studies about the role of civil society in supporting good governance in the continent, this does not mean marginalizing its role. Many of these organizations can, and have already done, achieve some accomplishments in supporting democracy and good governance in the continent, whether through a cooperative or confrontational approach to the state. The South African analyst “Adam Habib” presented examples of organizations that were able to involve in a developmental partnership with the state to confront the issues of development and marginalization, and others that were able to confront the state in support of democratic rule (the role of civil society in supporting the peaceful alternation of power in Ghana). “Donald P. Chimanikire” also emphasizes the role played by some non-governmental organizations in many African countries in filling the developmental vacuum that resulted from the relative withdrawal of the state after implementing structural adjustment programs with the weakness of the private sector. Indeed, “Guifte Chimanukiri” does not rule out that the role of these organizations will become more prominent in the future as a natural result and an appropriate alternative to the efficiency of other actors (the state and the private sector). (توفيق، 2005، صفحة 178)

There is no doubt that Chimanukiri’s argument is exaggerated; Because civil society, despite the developmental role it plays, cannot be an alternative to the developmental role of the state, especially since it is the state that ultimately determines the role played by its organizations, or at least influences this role. However, this proposition, at the same time, confirms that civil society in Africa remains an essential partner in achieving good governance, regardless of the approach it adopts. It also recognizes the importance of taking into account the obstacles affecting its role, which requires a new approach to deal with it by the African state and donor institutions. This approach should mainly focus on supporting its capabilities to support the participation of individuals, and supporting its institutional capabilities and skills that enable it to engage in a dialogue on development issues in African countries.

3.2 Good Governance and the Role of African Traditional Entities:

In addition to the importance of the entities organizing civil society, there is an important actor that must be taken into consideration upon discussing the good governance partnership in Africa. This actor is the traditional entities, as some of the new traditional authorities (the elders’ councils in Kenya, Somalia, and others) can be considered as part of civil society. (حسن، 2018، صفحة 38) The prominent role of these entities in modern African systems has prompted some analysts to try to reconcile these entities with modern structures of governance as a means of supporting the principles of good governance. Some African visions took the traditional entities as a basis for building new structures that are compatible with the modern structures of the state, given that traditional social structures in Africa such as extended families, the groups based on blood ties, tribes, and ethnic groups can play an important role in African development, as in some Asian countries. In some countries, such as Japan, Taiwan, and Korea, family-based companies were an important engine for growth and capital accumulation.

Also, the collective nature of African societies will serve the principles of good governance if authority is distributed or delegated to local rules and levels; Because this supports the participation of individuals in decision-making and helps to integrate the features of good governance that exist in traditional societies into the modern system. Furthermore, it facilitates communication between voters and their representatives and provides an early warning system that warns the executive body to address any source of instability. (Dec 2001: 8) On the other hand, some opinions draw attention to the difficulty of applying this approach to all African countries for several reasons including; The desire of some countries for absolute control, and most importantly, the historical role of the traditional groups under colonialism, which differed significantly from one case to another, making it not easy to apply a single approach in dealing with all of them. In the southern African region, for example, tribal chiefs were exploited by successive colonial governments against the peasants and the people. Then, the peasant revolutions against these chiefs became part of their struggle against colonialism and the domination of the white minority. In South Africa and Namibia, these chiefs presided over the isolated areas where marginalized Africans lived under apartheid. For all these reasons, it is no longer possible to exploit traditional groups in some countries as an engine for good governance. (Mafeje, 2003: 8)

Conclusion

Although good governance is mentioned in many African studies and analyses, many of these studies and analyses use it inaccurately, as they sometimes do not give it a specific meaning, or consider it a synonym for democracy. At other times, they consider it a synonym for the liberal ideology based on democracy and market economy.

Most of these studies prefer not to use the concept of good governance, and to use other terms such as democratic governance or efficient governance. Some observers attributed the reason for the sensitivity and rejection of most African analysts to the concept of good governance to the fact that it came from international institutions and is an integral part of the Western developmental ideological discourse. Rather, they believe that it is imposed on African countries and seeks to impose a specific economic and political pattern that ignores the economic and social reality of African societies.

Meanwhile, some African thinkers were preoccupied with refuting the concept of good governance and responding to it, just as they were preoccupied before by refuting the arguments of liberal democracy, structural adjustment programs, and other incoming concepts and paradigms. This has resulted in African thinkers missing out on a real contribution because instead of setting their own agenda that dismantles Western paradigms and perspectives and replaces them with new perspectives, they have committed themselves to responding to these Western concepts and assumptions. At the outset, they tried to redefine good governance in order to avoid its unaccepted implications set by the World Bank and impart social dimensions to the concept to link it to democracy and popular participation. After several efforts, African analysts found themselves returning to the starting point to ask: Is it basically possible to accept the term? Or should it be rejected in form and substance and use alternative terms instead?

Thus, the analysis took on a circular nature that does not add anything new to the concept and preoccupies African thinkers with Western research priorities. However, what was not mentioned in the analysis of these contributions is that the matter was not limited in some writing to refute the concept, but rather that refutation was sometimes not based on an objective reading of the concept as proposed by international institutions in their studies. That has many manifestations including that many of these writings put all visions about the concept of good governance in one basket, as they do not pay attention to the distinction between the contributions and different visions of international institutions. Also, some of these writings are consistent with the aspirations of African developmental thought about this concept. Moreover, it does not pay attention to the development of these institutions’ view of the concept and the evolution of its content from the administrative, technical meaning to the political content that raises the level of popular participation. Many African Analysts still believe that this concept is a limited technocratic concept related to the state’s capacity to govern administratively and technically, and they ignore the relationship between the state and citizens and the improvement of the standard of living.

Upon observing the concept of good governance in Africa, you realize that there are pressures on the political systems imposed by the modern political culture system, which can no longer be confined to one place or prevented from penetrating into societies at all levels.

The establishment of good governance in Africa faces many challenges, but they are not so difficult that they cannot be overcome. However, that requires a political, social, and intellectual will that reaches that level of resistance and thus reaches rationality and reform.