Archive for the ‘commentary’ Category
Matthew Flinders of the University of Sheffield also noted the discipline’s difficulties in a January 2014 commentary. “Political science has generally failed to fulfill its broader social responsibilities . . . It is — at least in some limited ways — to blame for ‘why we hate politics.'” Read the commentary.
“Criticism of the capacity of the state to deliver quality services has become widespread, generating cynicism and undermining trust in government,” says Carlos Santiso of the Inter-American Development Bank. In a commentary for Governance, Santiso identifies the three key steps toward improving government performance in Latin America and the Caribbean: creating “agile centers of government”; fostering a “technically competent and fiscally sustainable civil service”; and using new technologies to promote transparency. Free access to the commentary.
In a commentary for the next issue of Governance, Marcus Mietzner of Australian National University looks at the results of last month’s election in Indonesia, the world’s fourth most populous country. Enthusiasm over the election of Joko Widodo “is already giving way to a growing realization of the protracted problems” confronting the country, Mietzner says. These include “the fight against corruption, economic reform, infrastructure development, and reduction of wasteful subsidies.” Free access to the commentary.
Also: read earlier online comments on recent elections in India and the European Union by Thomas Risse, Alexander Katsaitis, Krishna Tummala, and Rahul Mukherji.
Finance Minister Roger Douglas announces 1984 Labour budget
Thirty years ago, on July 14, 1984, New Zealand voters elected a Labour government that launched a far-reaching program of public sector reforms. The “New Zealand model” became famous around the globe. In the current issue of Governance, Jonathan Boston and Chris Eichbaum of Victoria University examine the long-term effects of the reform program begun in 1984. Neoliberal reforms triggered electoral changes that made full realization of the neoliberal program impossible. Today, they write, “there is evidence of not one but two unfinished intellectual projects” — the neoliberal revolution, and the constitutional pushback. Free access to the commentary.
This is a working draft of a commentary By Sara Bice and Helen Sullivan of the Melbourne School of Government that will appear in the October issue of Governance. Leave your comments below or email the authors directly. The commentary will also be discussed at a roundtable at the Melbourne School of Government on May 20. More details about the roundtable.
Western approaches defined the 20th century emergence of policy studies as a distinctive scholarly field. In the 21st century, the ‘ascendance of Asia’ will demand critical reflection on how we define public policy, administration and governance; what public policy entails; and how it is managed and implemented. Will Harold Lasswell’s post-war vision of policy studies as a cross-cutting discipline capable of informing the decisions of industrial societies maintain salience? Or do the extraordinary changes wrought by globalisation demand a new orientation for policy studies?
We argue here that the construct, content and conduct of policy studies must respond to the challenges and opportunities of the ‘Asian Century.’ At its core, the ‘Asian Century’ presents a global milieu where economic, cultural, political, environmental and social issues will be heavily influenced by growth and activities in the Asian region. Only through acknowledging and responding to these influences might policy studies equip current and future public managers with the capabilities and skills necessary to create and manage policy successfully. Read the rest of this entry »
“If we are not in the most dysfunctional period in our history,” says Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, “we are certainly in the top five.” The problem isn’t just ideological polarization, Orenstein argues in a new commentary for Governance. It’s tribalism — “an approach were if you are for it, I am reflexively against it, even if I was for it yesterday.” Many factors encourage tribalism: skewed redistricting, campaign financing, and the transformation of mainstream media. And the consequences are profound. “Political dysfunction,” Ornstein concludes , threatens “the health, well-being, and future prospects for the country.” Free access to the commentary.